University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Elementary principals attitudes, perceptions, and their ability to support students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances in inclusive settings

(USC Thesis Other)

Elementary principals attitudes, perceptions, and their ability to support students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances in inclusive settings

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 1

Elementary Principals Attitudes, Perceptions, and Their Ability to Support Students
with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances In Inclusive Settings
by
Tamara Quinn

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2020

Copyright 2020 Tamara Quinn
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 2

Acknowledgements
The path toward this dissertation has been extensive and demanding. Its completion is
thanks in large part to many special people who challenged, supported, and believed in me. First,
I would like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Rudy Castruita. He has guided me and taught me
more than I could ever give him credit for; his personal and professional guidance has allowed
me to grow into my leadership. To my other two committee members, Dr. David Cash and Dr.
John Roach, thank you for your generosity, kindness, and thoughtful feedback that allowed me to
move forward and finish this project. To my BAB crew, thank you for being there for me,
pushing me, pulling me, and guiding me through all the times I didn’t think this would be
possible; we did it!!!
To those who participated in this research, thank you for your thoughts, wisdom, and
most of all your precious time. To Tammie, you have been a quiet unsung hero in my life. Thank
you for all the encouragement, support, patience, and love; you are an unselfish, amazing friend
and I appreciate you more than I can explain. To my mom, who has taught me my whole life
how to persevere not only through words but actions. Thank you for loving me, nurturing me,
pushing me, and always expecting more than I thought I could give. You are the reason I am the
person I am today, thank you and I love you. To my partner and best friend, Francesca, thank
you for your love, your support, and everything you have done and continue to do for me. To
Katie and Jenna, thank you for allowing me to love and care in a way I didn’t know was
possible.
Last but not least, thank you to my past and current students who made this project
something that comes from my heart. I will always fight for what is best for all of you and to
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 3

help show the world that your difference is not a disability but a beautiful set of abilities to be
embraced and celebrated.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 4

Table of Contents
Abstract............................................................................................................................................9
Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................................10
Background of the Problem .....................................................................................................11
Statement of the Problem.........................................................................................................13
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................14
Research Questions..................................................................................................................14
Significance of the Study.........................................................................................................15
Limitations/Delimitations ........................................................................................................15
Definition of Terms..................................................................................................................15
Organization of the Study ........................................................................................................16
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................17
Historical Perspective ..............................................................................................................19
History of Special Education in the United States.............................................................19
IDEA..................................................................................................................................22
Demographics for Students with Disabilities ....................................................................25
Inclusion...................................................................................................................................26
Different Kinds of Inclusion Practices for Students with Disabilities...............................26
Kinds and Levels of Supports............................................................................................29
Inclusion Trainings for Teachers and Administrators .......................................................31
Challenges and Barriers to Inclusion .................................................................................35
Leadership Characteristics.......................................................................................................38
Attitudes and Perceptions of Principals in Inclusion .........................................................38
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 5

Characteristics of Good Leaders........................................................................................41
Asset Based Lens of Ability ..............................................................................................42
Transformational Leadership.............................................................................................43
Summary..................................................................................................................................45
Chapter Three: Methodology.........................................................................................................46
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................46
Research Questions..................................................................................................................46
Methodology............................................................................................................................47
Sample and Population ............................................................................................................47
Instrumentation ........................................................................................................................48
Quantitative........................................................................................................................48
Qualitative..........................................................................................................................49
Conceptual Framework............................................................................................................50
Data Collection Procedures......................................................................................................51
Data Analysis...........................................................................................................................53
Validity and Reliability............................................................................................................54
Summary..................................................................................................................................54
Chapter 4: Findings........................................................................................................................55
Introduction..............................................................................................................................55
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................56
Presentation of Findings ..........................................................................................................57
Research Questions..................................................................................................................57
Organization of Data Analysis.................................................................................................57
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 6

Descriptive Characteristics ......................................................................................................58
Survey Participants ............................................................................................................58
Interview Participants ........................................................................................................59
Findings ...................................................................................................................................60
Research Question 1 ..........................................................................................................60
Inclusion.............................................................................................................................61
Teachers’ Reception to Inclusion.......................................................................................62
Difficult Part of Inclusion ..................................................................................................62
Trainings/PD’s for Teachers/Staff .....................................................................................63
Research Question 2 ..........................................................................................................64
Paraeducator Support.........................................................................................................64
Being Present .....................................................................................................................65
Trainings ............................................................................................................................66
Overall Level of Support ...................................................................................................67
Research Question 3 ..........................................................................................................67
Bureaucracy .......................................................................................................................68
Training..............................................................................................................................68
Money/Personnel ...............................................................................................................70
Research Question 4 ..........................................................................................................71
Needed Supports ................................................................................................................71
Inclusion/Willingness to Include Students.........................................................................72
Trainings Received ............................................................................................................73
Overall Level of Support ...................................................................................................73
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 7

Chapter Summary ....................................................................................................................74
Chapter 5: Summary, Findings, Implications, and Conclusion of the Study.................................76
Statement of the Problem.........................................................................................................76
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................76
Research Questions..................................................................................................................77
Design Overview .....................................................................................................................77
Key Findings............................................................................................................................79
Principal Findings ..............................................................................................................79
Teacher Findings................................................................................................................79
Implications for Policy and Practice........................................................................................80
Policy .................................................................................................................................81
Practices .............................................................................................................................82
Limitations ...............................................................................................................................83
Recommendations for Future Research...................................................................................83
Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................84
References......................................................................................................................................86
Tables.............................................................................................................................................95
Figures..........................................................................................................................................100
Appendix A: Cover Letter ...........................................................................................................102
Appendix B: Survey.....................................................................................................................103

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 8

List of Tables
Table 1 Survey and interview selection criteria.............................................................................95
Table 2 Survey participants ...........................................................................................................96
Table 3 Principal survey data.........................................................................................................97
Table 4 Principal interview participants ........................................................................................98
Table 5 Teacher Interview Participants .........................................................................................99
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 9

List of Figures
Figure 1 Triangulation .................................................................................................................100
Figure 2 Success of Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disorders Using
Asset-Based Theory Perspective Leadership and Transformational Leadership
Practices .........................................................................................................................101

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 10

Abstract
This dissertation investigated inclusion in elementary school. The study used a mixed method
study to examine the perceptions, attitudes, and ability of elementary principals to help general
education teachers who include students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in their
classrooms. The topic was chosen due to the higher prevalence of students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders in schools, requiring principals’ support. This study found that
principals have more inclusive attitudes regarding students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders than in previous studies; however, the study also found that principals and teachers
need more trainings and additional support for personnel to implement inclusion with fidelity for
these students. This study was limited in its scope yet it indicates the need for further research in
the areas of inclusion and teacher training programs.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 11

Chapter One: Introduction
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997) was established in
response to public educations’ struggle to provide appropriate services, funding, and
accountability for students with disabilities (Telzrow & Tankersley, 2000). IDEA (1997) is a
legislative initiative established for academic accountability success for all public-school
students. Due to IDEA and the need to better serve each student, states and districts have
implemented inclusion programs. These inclusion programs mean students who have a disability
are educated within the general education classroom with other services, such as learning center,
speech, occupational therapy, etc. provided as needed. These programs vary from state to state,
district to district, and often times school to school and there are multiple variables that
contribute to a programs’ success. One of these variables is the principals’ attitude and the role
they take toward inclusion for students with special needs.
During the 2014-2015 school year, 6.6 million public school students ages 3-21 received
special-education services, which is 13.1% of all school children. Of those 6.6 million students,
14% have autism or emotional behavioral disturbances, which is approximately 925,000 students
(Praisner, 2003). According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) about 1 out
of 59 children have a diagnosis of autism, with boys being four times more likely to be
diagnosed and one out of seven children are diagnosed with a mental, behavioral, or
developmental disorder (Autism Speaks, 2018). Given these statistics and current policy
emphasis to include children with disabilities in general education classes, school leaders must
be aware and take an active role in their schools/districts inclusion practices and policies.
The job of elementary (kindergarten through fifth grade) principals today means
constantly multi-tasking and shifting roles at any given time (Habegger, 2008). New role shifts
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 12

include leading their general education teaching staff through changing educational policies and
procedures, such as the current policy of inclusive education. According to Ferguson (2014), the
current educational policy of inclusive education means that more children with disabilities and
special-education needs are being placed in general education classrooms instead of separate
schools. However, even though elementary school leaders need to take the lead to best
incorporate students with disabilities, including autism and emotional behavioral disturbances, in
general education classrooms research has shown that often they are not prepared to facilitate
this transition and they don’t know their role in the implementation. Research has found issues
related to elementary school administrators’ awareness of practices to facilitate inclusion,
preparation to implement and support inclusive education, and that the majority of principals
(80%) are uncertain about inclusion for students with disabilities (Barnett & Monda-
Amaya,1998; Praisner, 2003). Many researchers in the 20th century spent ample time studying
which strategies made certain individuals great leaders (Northouse, 2007), but research needs to
be done to adequately explore the strategies and roles needed for effective inclusionary
leadership.
Background of the Problem
Unlike prior years, students with disabilities, including students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances, are being educated alongside their typical developing peers,
no longer in separate classrooms. Due to an increase in students with disabilities, 6.6 million
students during the 2014-2015 school year, an emphasis has been made to include children with
disabilities in mainstream classes. The need to better serve each student led to the creation of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997).
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 13

The development of the IDEA (1997) has subsequently directed implementation of
inclusion programs across the nation. These inclusion programs vary depending on the state,
district, and school and there are multiple variables that contribute to a programs’ success. Many
variables that contribute to an inclusion programs’ success have not been adequately researched,
such as the effects of an elementary principals’ perceptions, attitudes, and supports on
inclusionary practices.
The perceptions and supports of elementary principals will be looked at through the
theory of principals as transformational leaders. Transformational leadership gives attention to
the charismatic and affective elements of leadership (Northouse, 2017). According to this
theory, transformational leaders who demonstrate these charismatic elements have followers who
trust their ideology, identify with the leader, and show affection toward their leader. A
transformational leader has the ability to change and transform people by getting them
emotionally involved and providing a leader who gives them increased confidence (Northouse,
2017).
Strategies that are used by transformational leaders during a time of transformation,
including increased inclusion for students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances,
are: developing and articulating a clear vision of the future, creating shared meanings for their
organizations, creating trust in their organization, knowing their strengths and weaknesses, and
emphasizing their strengths (Northouse, 2017). An elementary principal in the position of
leading his school through the transformation of inclusion for more students will need to create a
trust within their organization, especially with general education teachers and the families of
students. These leaders will need to emphasize the schools’ strengths while dealing with the
challenges and obstacles of implementing a new policy. A transformational leader must be
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 14

effective at working with people through collaboration (Northouse, 2017). This is especially true
of principals who are leading a school through a change that requires collaboration among
multiple staff members and disciplines, as is the case for mainstreaming students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances. Lastly, transformational leaders strive to inspire followers
while also understanding the need to adapt to the needs and motives of their followers
(Northouse, 2017). Principals who are introducing inclusion and/or expanding the level of
inclusion practices at their schools need to make their staff feel and believe that they will be able
to achieve this goal, while also listening to and acting on the needs of the staff. In order to be a
transformational leader, principals must know their own attitudes, perceptions of inclusion, and
understand how to best support their staff.
Statement of the Problem
According to Ferguson (2014), the current educational policy of inclusive education
means that more children with disabilities and special-education needs are being placed in
mainstream education instead of separate schools. However, even though elementary school
leaders need to take the lead to best incorporate students with disabilities, including autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances, in general-education classes research has shown that often
they are not prepared to facilitate this transition and they don’t know their role in the
implementation. Research has found issues related to elementary administrators’ awareness of
practices to facilitate inclusion, preparation to implement and support inclusive education, and
that the majority of principals (80%) are uncertain about inclusion for students with disabilities
(Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998; Praisner, 2003). Additional research needs to be conducted in
order to evaluate elementary principals’ attitudes and perceptions of and ability to support
inclusion practices at their school.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 15

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to develop a better understanding of the attitudes and
perceptions of elementary principals around helping teachers and how they provide support to
teachers who are teaching students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances in an
inclusive setting. This study was an explanatory, sequential mixed-methods design. The
researcher used an explanatory, sequential mixed-method design to collect quantitative data,
analyze the results, and then build the qualitative phase. For this study, the researcher initially
surveyed elementary principals to examine factors that may predict a successful inclusion
program and then followed that survey up with qualitative interviews of principals and
elementary teachers about the principals’ ability to help and the support general education
teachers as part of an inclusionary program.
Research Questions
The following research questions were used to guide the study:
1. What perceptions do elementary principals have about their ability to help teachers who
are educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive
setting?
2. What support does kindergarten through fifth grade elementary principals provide
teachers when educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an
inclusive setting?
3. What perceptions do elementary teachers have about their principals’ ability to help them
educate students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
4. What kind of support do elementary teachers need from their principals when educating
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 16

Significance of the Study
This study helped to define and understand the elementary principals’ role in helping
their general education teachers educate students with autism and emotional behavioral
disturbances in a general education environment. The prevalence of students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances has increased over the last 20 years and their need and right to
be educated makes the principals’ ability to help their staff fulfill this need extremely imperative.
The results from this study will help prepare principals to be an effective, inclusive leader and,
therefore, improve the results for students with disabilities.
Limitations/Delimitations
This study has a few limitations, namely that the scope of the disabilities being studied
are children with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances, and that the study only looked at
elementary principals and teachers.
However, it is felt even with those limitations the study can broadly help within the field
of education since inclusion starts and happens the most often in elementary schools. This
means that the need for understanding the role and the ability to support these inclusion
programs is most important at this level. Additionally, the incidence of students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances continues to rise and, therefore, the numbers for students with
these disabilities being included in the general education environment will also rise.
Definition of Terms
Autism- A mental condition that is present from early childhood, characterized by
difficulty in communicating and forming relationships with other people in using language and
abstract concepts.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 17

Emotional Behavioral Disturbances- A disability classification characterized by an
inability to build or maintain interpersonal relationships with peers; an inability to learn that
cannot be adequately explained by intellectual, sensory, or health factors; chronic inappropriate
type of behavior or feelings; a displayed pervasive mood of depression; and a displayed tendency
to develop physical symptoms, pains, or unreasonable fears associated with personal or school
problems.
Inclusion- Students who have a disability are educated within the general-education
classroom with other services, such as learning center, speech, occupational therapy, etc.
provided as needed.
Transformational Leadership Theory- A leadership approach that creates valuable and
positive change in individuals and the social system with the end goal of developing followers
into leaders.
Organization of the Study
The following chapter will be a review of the literature on elementary principals’
perceptions and supports for general-education teachers who are mainstreaming students with
autism and emotional/behavioral disorders.

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 18

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Special-education legislation and advocacy leading to inclusion can be traced back over
the last 65 years starting with education equity and access for students with disabilities in Brown
v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)
and subsequent amendments were the initial educational legislations to address students with
special needs and the next major law, The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (U. S. Department of
Education, 2017) required people with disabilities to have access to public buildings and set the
stage for special-education laws, including the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA, 1997). The IDEA (1997) provided instructions on qualifying techniques, special-
education services, and the rights of students. By the end of the 20th century, research into the
outcomes of segregated education revealed a lack of success leading to a growing agreement that
inclusion was appropriate for restructuring education. The IDEIA of 2004 requires students with
disabilities be educated in the general-education classroom, providing the initial advancement for
inclusive education. The significance of inclusion for students with disabilities, specifically
autism and emotional behavioral disturbances, is ever growing due to the high rate of students in
special education. During the 2014-2015 school year, 6.6 million public school students, or
13.1% of all school children, received special-education services. These statistics, especially for
students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances, are expected to grow which will
cause a larger need for increased supports and services in the general-education setting.
Similar to the history of special education in the United States, inclusion for students with
disabilities has been done in increments and has not been implemented as distinctly as the laws
have mandated. The current educational platform of full inclusion is different from the earlier
programs of mainstreaming and integration in that it assumes students with disabilities have a
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 19

home base in the general-education classroom. To make this possible, all educators in an
inclusive setting, including the principal, must view all students as capable. Inclusion implies
meeting the children’s needs in the general-education setting, though it takes on different forms
such as MTSS and RtI. The success of any form of inclusion requires trainings and in-services
to principals in order to receive more information, understanding, and acceptance about special
education. Administrators with special-education qualifications, trainings, and experiences have
more positive attitudes toward inclusion for students with disabilities. Inclusion is part of a
transformational process, so if key members are not supportive of the progression then there will
be difficulties with the execution and operation of the policy. Many challenges and barriers exist
for inclusion, however, the most frequently cited are negative attitudes.
Many factors contribute or hinder the successful implementation of an inclusion program
such as an elementary principals’ attitude toward students with disabilities. Elementary
principals are in a leadership position which means their attitudes have a big influence on
inclusion, or lack thereof, for students with disabilities. Success of an organizational change,
such as inclusion, depends on things like positive experiences, supports, and the elementary
principals’ leadership style. There is a strong, direct relationship between elementary principals
and the success of the school and its students. Elementary principals need to facilitate leadership
strategies that are transformational and asset based. A transformational leader is someone who
implements a change by motivating and pushing their staff, which is the kind of leader that is
necessary for a district and school going through an educational reform, such as inclusion.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 20

Historical Perspective
History of Special Education in the United States
The first documented special-education program in the United States goes back to 1823
when the state of Kentucky established a school for people who were deaf (Harris, 2009). Over
the next 100 years, two Supreme Court rulings further separated children with special needs from
their typical peers. In 1893 in the case of Watson v. City of Cambridge, the Massachusetts
Supreme Court ruled that children who were unable to benefit from instruction, who were “weak
in mind,” and who were not able to physically care for themselves could be expelled from public
schools (Yell, Rogers, & Rogers, 1998). The turn of the 20th century did not bring any
additional public-school integration for students with special needs as evidenced by the Beattie v.
Board of Education in 1919 (Yell et al., 1998). In the case of Beattie v. Board of Education
(1919), the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that a student who had attended school until the fifth
grade could be excluded because the student’s condition nauseated the teachers, required too
much attention, and negatively affected the school (Yell et al., 1998).
Special education and integration can only be traced back over the last 65 years starting
with litigants advocating for people with disabilities who were seeking education equity and
access for students with disabilities in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954, Jacobs,
2012). Over the next 15 years, the course of special education remained sinuous. Two federal
laws, the Mentally Retarded Children Act of 1958 and the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 were established to improve the quality of special education (Jacobs, 2012).
However, in stark contrast to these laws, in 1958 and 1969 the courts upheld legislation which
excluded students who were “mentally deficient” from public school attendance and made it a
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 21

crime for parents to persist in forcing the attendance of a child with disabilities after such
exclusion (Yell et al., 1998).
By the 1960’s, the criticism against segregated education for children with disabilities
intensified due to advocacy groups. Political pressure from disability and parent advocacy
groups, which declared that societal values about disability were changing, brought about
education reform in the form of new legislation. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (ESEA) was used as the basis for early special-education legislation as well as three
amendments in 1965, 1966, and 1968 (Weller, 2012). The ESEA (1965) and the subsequent
amendments were the initial precipice of educational legislation to address students with special
needs. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is considered to be the first legislation specifically for
individuals with disabilities. This law required people with disabilities to have access to public
buildings and set the stage for additional special-education laws, including the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997; Harris, 2009).
The first special-education legislation that impacted public education was when the
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 was enacted (Weller, 2012). This act,
which mandated a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) for all children with disabilities
and mandated individualized educational plans (IEP), became the core federal funding for
special education (Weller, 2012). According to Rudd (2002), prior to the enactment of the
Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 most children with disabilities were not
encouraged to attend public schools and parents were told their children were uneducable
prompting them to educate their disabled children at home (Harris, 2009). A few years after the
Education for All Handicapped Children Act was passed, California required local agencies or
counties to produce a plan to provide services to all students with disabilities ages three to 22
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 22

(Rudd, 2002). The plan each local agency/county produced is termed the Special Education
Local Plan Area (SELPA). Each SELPA must consist of a governing board, community advisor
committee, and an executive director to assist the districts who are servicing the students with
disabilities (Jacobs, 2012).
In 1990, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act was renamed to Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and autism was added as a separate and distinct category
of disability (Weller, 2012). The IDEA amendment of 1997 provided instructions on qualifying
techniques, special-education services, and student rights (Jacobs, 2012). By the end of the 20th
century, research into the outcomes of segregated education revealed a lack of success leading to
a growing agreement that inclusion was “an appropriate philosophy and a relevant framework for
restructuring education” (Ferguson, 2014, p. 22). In 2001, No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
became the reauthorization of ESEA with the goal of making all public-school students
proficient in reading and mathematics, including students with disabilities (Jacobs, 2012).
NCLB (2002) which is aligned to curriculum standards, along with the IDEA Amendment of
1997, are legislative initiatives that ensure high-quality instruction, accountability of academic
success, and scientifically-based practices for all instruction requiring educators to offer
appropriate education and services (Jacobs, 2012; Friend, Cook, Hurley-Chamberlain, &
Shamberger, 2010). Both measures were established due to public education’s struggles with
funding, appropriate services, and accountability measures for students with disabilities (Friend
et al., 2010).
Throughout the history of the United States, children with disabilities have moved from
total neglect into their schools of residence (Reynolds, 1989). This movement was not linear,
nor has it always been accepted by educators and families, but there has been rapid progress.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 23

Services and placements for students with disabilities has gone from residential schools, to
special-day schools, then special-day classes on school district campuses, pull-out
procedures/services, mainstreaming, and now we are working more toward full inclusion.
(Reynolds, 1989).
There are two federal laws that govern the education for children with disabilities– IDEIA
2004: Reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or Individuals with
Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973. However, neither requires inclusion and although IDEIA is the driving legal mandate for
inclusive education it fails to define what is meant by an appropriate education for students and
does not delineate the implementation within states or districts for students with disabilities
(Harris, 2009; Jacobs, 2012; Weller, 2012).
IDEA
According to Kurz (2014), IDEA has three foundational assumptions: all students can
learn, student learning needs to be measured, and schools are accountable to measure their
learning. The current IDEIA of 2004 maintained the original concentration of the Education for
All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 by specifying safeguards for due process and rights for
students with disabilities and their families (Sugai & Horner, 2009). The reauthorization of
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 inserted an additional layer of
federal laws that mandated public school accountability for students with disabilities (Jacobs,
2012). The IDEA legislation was designed to overlap with NCLB to include all students with
disabilities to participate in state and district assessments which aligns with the regulations of
NCLB (Jacobs, 2012; Sugai & Horner, 2009).
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 24

Prior to the current IDEIA, which was signed in December 2004 by President Bush,
many states were excluding students with disabilities from their assessment accountability
system (Jacobs, 2012; Sugai & Horner, 2009). This most current IDEIA reauthorization includes
provisions for the development and execution of alternate assessments if they are needed due to
the students’ disability, such as an additional time or a quiet area to complete assessments
(Jacobs, 2012). According to Savich (2008 as cited in Harris, 2009), the IDEIA of 2004 requires
that students with disabilities be educated in the regular education classroom and provided the
initial legal advancement for inclusive education. IDEIA of 2004 mandates that:
Each state must establish procedures that assure that, to the maximum extent appropriate,
children with disabilities . . . are educated with children who are not disabled unless the
nature or severity of the disability is such that education in the regular classes with the
use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. (Savich, 2008,
p. 16)
An Individualized Education Plan (IEP) is a document that is used in schools for students
with disabilities to meet the mandates of the IDEIA of 2004. The IEP document specifies
present levels for students, accommodations or modifications that the child may need in class,
and goals and services so that the child can make progress. The IEP team which is made up of
the child’s parents/guardians, a special educator, a general-education teacher, and specialists who
can interpret the evaluation results such as a school psychologist and/or speech-language
pathologist decide on the educational program and placement for each individual student who
qualifies for special-education services (Weller, 2012). There are different approaches that
teams can utilize collaboratively which outline and assist with planning the content of IEPs for
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 25

students with significant disabilities in general-education settings, which would make inclusion
the most appropriate for that particular student.
The importance of collaboration among the IEP team was made more apparent with the
reauthorization of the IDEIA (2004). The reauthorization increased expectations for school
administrators to endorse and authorize educational reforms to guarantee inclusive education for
students with disabilities, directly summoning an increase in the leadership role of school
principals (Harris, 2009). The push for an inclusive education across the country is to provide
services and programs for students with disabilities in the same setting as their non-disabled
peers, termed the least restrictive environment (LRE; Jacobs, 2012). The least restrictive
environment law states:
(i) To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities . . . are educated with
children who are not disabled, and (ii) special classes, separate schooling, or other
removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs
only if the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular
classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily
(IDEIA 2004, p. 3)
This push requires support and services to be brought to the student instead of the student
needing to move to a separate setting as was done under the previous IDEA authorization in
1997. Having more students with disabilities in general-education classrooms requires school
administrators, especially the school principal, to be an active participant in creating,
implementing, and following through with supports, trainings, and supplementary aids for the
students and the teachers.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 26

Demographics for Students with Disabilities
All students with disabilities benefit from supports, trainings, and supplementary aides in
their classrooms, but two disabilities that are often the most difficult for teachers and
administrators to include are students with autism and students with emotional behavioral
disturbances. During the 2014-2015 school year, 6.6 million public school students ages 3-21
received special-education services, which is 13.1% of all school children. Of those 6.6 million
students, 14% have autism or emotional behavioral disturbances, which is approximately
925,000 students (Praisner, 2003). These are students who need to be helped but also included in
general-education classes. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
about 1 out of 59 children have a diagnosis of autism, with boys being four times more likely to
be diagnosed and 1 out of 7 children are diagnosed with a mental, behavioral, or developmental
disorder (National Institute of Mental Health, 2018). According to Manna (2008), 95% of all
students with disabilities are now educated in traditional public schools instead of being home
schooled. Of these students, more than half from ages 6 to 21 spend at least 80% of their school
day in the general-education classroom (Jacobs, 2012).
These statistics are already high and show a need for increased supports for these students
and teachers, and the numbers are only expected to grow. It is estimated that there are currently
as many as nine million children in the United States with serious emotional disturbances and
that the estimate is projected to rise in the next 50 years from 20 to 50% (Harris, 2009).
Additionally, the United States government statistics suggested that the rate of autism is climbing
by 10 to 17 percent annually and since 1997 autism is the only disability category that has more
than quintupled in number (Loiacono & Valenti, 2010; Weller, 2012).
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 27

“The number of students with disabilities served under IDEA continues to grow at a
greater rate than both the resident population and school enrollment (2000, p. xxxiii)” (Loiacono
& Allen, 2008. p. 120). Due to the increase in students with autism and emotional behavioral
disturbance, along with the expectation that the numbers will continue to rise, elementary
principals need to provide an environment that will offer appropriate placements and instruction
for all students with disabilities (Weller, 2012)
Inclusion
Different Kinds of Inclusion Practices for Students with Disabilities
Synonymous with the history of special education in the United States, the
mainstreaming/integration/inclusion of students with disabilities has been done in steps and has
not been implemented as clearly as the laws have mandated. States and districts started with
what was termed mainstreaming students with disabilities, which then led to the integration of
students with disabilities, and finally the inclusion of students in general-education classrooms.
There have been and continue to be multiple kinds and levels of inclusionary practices for
students with disabilities in the United States.
The critical difference between full inclusion and the earlier programs of including
students with disabilities is that mainstreaming and integration assume that students with special
needs have a home base in the special-education setting (Mesibov & Shea, 1996). This means
that they are pulled from this special-education, home-base placement to be periodically placed
into the general-education setting. The general-education setting is every students’ placement
and not one that needs to be earned (Mesibov & Shea, 1996). This critical and often overlooked
distinction between inclusion and mainstreaming/integration becomes part of the broad human
rights’ itinerary that all forms of segregation are morally wrong (Avramidis, Bayliss, & Burden,
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 28

2000). Inclusion is more than a set of approaches and exercises; it is an educational position that
“respects and builds on the uniqueness that each learner brings to the classroom” (Weller, 2012,
p. 42).
Students with certain disabilities such as specific-learning disability and speech and
language impairment are more easily included in all general-education settings than students who
have other disabilities, such as autism and emotional behavioral disturbances. In a study done by
Praisner (2003), regular education settings were chosen less frequently for students with
emotional disturbance (20.4%) and autism (30.1%). This means that only 1 out of every 5 and 1
out of every 3.5 students with emotional behavioral disturbance and autism, respectively, were
selected for a general-education placement. The term full inclusion which seeks to educate
students with disabilities in general-education classrooms rather than in segregated placement
and is mandated by IDEIA of 2004, bears multiple meanings, inferences, and implementations
(Lewis, Chard, & Scott, 1994; Mayrowetz & Weinstein, 1999). Often times, it’s the students
who display more maladaptive behaviors that are the first to be excluded; for instance, students
with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances.
To improve and make the public schools truly an inclusive setting for all children
requires restructuring, collaboration, trainings, and evidence-based instructional practices. A
common form of school restructuring to enable inclusionary practices is to bring the services to
the child in the general-education setting instead of providing services in a pull-out setting
(Harrower, 1999). This conventional approach provides additional support for the general-
education teachers, allows the service providers to observe their students’ ability to function with
their peers, makes collaboration easier and necessary, and, most importantly, does not remove
the student from their placement. Another customary approach to inclusion is using action
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 29

research. The approach that action research takes is utilizing in-service trainings for educators in
order to collaboratively design and execute their own interventions to focus on inclusion-related
issues for students with disabilities (Harrower, 1999). Applying evidence-based instructional
practices in an inclusion setting is very important. An instructional practice that is supported by
research and has effectively improved academic achievement is explicit instruction (Benner,
Kutash, Nelson, & Fisher, 2013). Explicit instruction is a direct teaching approach that proceeds
in small increments, provides lots of examples, checks for understanding, and elicits student
participation (Benner et al., 2013). This is an instructional method that would work for all
students, including students with disabilities like autism and emotional behavioral disturbances.
According to Benner et al. (2013), explicit instruction along with multi-tiered systems of
academic prevention and maximizing learning time allows educators to focus on closing the gap
for students with emotional behavioral disturbances and autism. The importance of inclusion
means that these settings must be supported by trained personnel in order to meet the needs of
each individual (Harris, 2009) which requires assistance from the elementary principal.
According to Giangreco, Carter, Doyle, and Suter (2010), having an inclusive-school
setting emphasizes independence and interdependence. Independence and interdependence
necessitate that the general-education teachers do not relinquish the responsibility for students
with disabilities instead they work cooperatively with special educators to provide a quality
education for every student (Praisner, 2003). Educators, including the elementary principal, in
an inclusive setting view all students as capable and complex and value the school as a sense of
community (Weller, 2012). Elementary principals in schools have many roles and
responsibilities at the school site including creating and sustaining successful inclusion programs
(Praisner, 2003). Creating and sustaining inclusion programs provides teachers and principals
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 30

experiences with programs as well as experiences with students with disabilities. According to
(Praisner, 2003), when principals have more positive experiences with students with disabilities
then they become more willing to include students in general education that may not have
initially been seen as a student who could be included. Additionally, teachers who have active
experiences with inclusion because they are implementing programs possess more positive
attitudes (Avramidis et al., 2000).
Kinds and Levels of Supports
Since the IDEIA of 2004 does not define inclusion, the kinds and levels of support in
general education vary from state to state, school to school, and even classroom to classroom
(Harris, 2009). There are a few supports whose names are commonly cited and utilized in school
districts throughout the United States: multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS), positive behavior
intervention and supports (PBIS), and response-to-intervention (RtI). Often the names are used
interchangeably; however, they are all distinctly different and currently RtI is being implemented
the most frequently.
All three utilize tiered frameworks of support for students in the general-education
environment. PBIS is a three-tiered prevention and intervention model that is designed to
“promote positive school cultures and prevent problem behaviors in school settings” (George,
George, Kern, & Fogt, 2013). Additionally, PBIS provides a framework for behavior by
establishing a social culture and behavioral supports to create an effective learning environment
for all students (Benner et al., 2013). The MTSS is a schoolwide framework that also uses a
tiered, systematic approach with varying levels of intensities to increase academic achievement
and student engagement by reducing behavioral and disciplinary distractions (Gamm et al., 2012;
Haynes, 2012). MTSS matches instructional resources with educational needs and makes
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 31

adjustments so students will have continued improvement in performance and progress as well as
assessing the effectiveness of instruction on student outcomes (Gamm et al., 2012). MTSS is an
evidenced-based model that uses data-based, problem-solving methods to integrate academic and
behavioral instruction and focuses on students’ needs in all areas (Gamm et al., 2012; Haynes,
2012). MTSS connects the efforts of school personnel and resources and provides a framework
for ‘how’ and ‘when’ to teach the Common Core Standards (Gamm et al., 2012).
RtI, which is the one most currently implemented in schools, provides different levels or
intensity to match the identified need (Haynes, 2012). Response-to-Intervention denoted a
scientifically based, effective intervention that accentuated a practical way to identify student
needs and improve instructional outcomes (Sugai & Horner, 2009). RtI operates on three basic
principles: all students can learn, that effective instruction is the most powerful predictor of
student success, and schools are responsible for preventing failure by providing all students an
education from which they can benefit (Haynes, 2012). RtI is best implemented in an
environment where teachers collaborate amongst themselves, with the community, and with
parents. In RtI, the entire team will collaborate to provide guidance, make decisions, and take
responsibility for the students’ welfare, both academically and socially (Haynes, 2012).
These supports coincide with the IDEIA of 2004 which determined that inclusion implies
meeting the children’s needs in the general-education system so that these students can be
socialized and educated with their peers (McFarland et al., 2017). The use of these common,
tiered supports are utilized to create inclusive policies, their success and failures will depend on
the school administration, specifically the elementary principal (Harris, 2009).
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 32

Inclusion Trainings for Teachers and Administrators
The success and failure of all programs, including inclusion, depends on administrators;
specifically, how well-trained they are and well they train their staff. This is an area of weakness
for inclusionary strategies, practices, and expectations. In order to improve successful inclusion
efforts, elementary principals require trainings and in-services to receive more information about
special education (Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998; Cohen, 2015).
Since inclusion is done within classrooms, people view it as a teacher concern; however,
appropriate implementation of the LRE mandate depends on well-trained teachers and well-
trained school administrators, specifically the elementary principal (Harris, 2009). Principals are
the instructional leaders of the school, including the areas of special education, LRE, and
inclusion. Elementary principals should search for professional development opportunities that
are geared toward working with students with disabilities in the general-education setting
(Williams, 2015).
In a study done by Cohen (2015), researchers found a positive correlation between
training in special education and concerns and competencies. Preparation programs as well as
continued in-service trainings for elementary principals need to concentrate on inclusion as part
of their curriculum. In a study done by Praisner (2003), exposure to special-education concepts
through special-education classes and trainings were associated with a more positive attitude
toward inclusion. Unfortunately, many elementary principals feel they are unprepared to be
leaders in special education due to a lack of necessary coursework and experience (Loiacono &
Valenti, 2010). The knowledge and the opportunities to gain knowledge is an important resource
to create successful inclusion programs. According to Mayrowetz and Weinstein (1999), two
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 33

types of knowledge is needed to create and implement successful inclusion: an understanding
about inclusion and an understanding of specific disabilities.
In addition to knowledge about how inclusion works and about the disabilities of students
who will be included, administrators need hands-on experience. Professional development given
by the district, and support by the special-education director and outside consultants, for
elementary principals should include opportunities to observe and participate in efficacious
inclusion programs for students with disabilities (Praisner, 2003). Additional professional
development for elementary principals should incorporate special law mandates and provide
practical solutions for prosperous inclusion programs such as implementing LRE for all students
(Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998). Providing elementary principals with knowledge to
understand special education, inclusion, and learning about disabilities is an important initial step
in educating all public-school students. When administrators have special-education
qualifications, including courses, trainings, and experiences, they have more positive attitudes
toward inclusion for students with disabilities (Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998).
Elementary principals are the instructional leaders of the school and they need to be
knowledgeable about all programs at their school site, including inclusion, but the training and
experiences cannot stop there and expect that any program will be successful. Elementary
principals must provide their staff with appropriate training, access to additional professional
development about teaching practices and strategies, and access to support personnel in order to
deliver the best instruction for students with disabilities (Weller, 2012). Although the need for
trainings and education about inclusion is imperative for teachers, no principals in a study
conducted by Weller (2012) had provided any type of professional development for their
general-education teachers concerning inclusion.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 34

Teachers have not received adequate courses during their preparation nor are they
receiving professional developments through their school districts for working with students with
disabilities, especially for students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances in an
inclusive setting. This is the case even though elementary principals do not believe teachers are
adequately prepared to support inclusive educational practices and teachers are committed to
professional development as a way to develop teaching strategies for inclusive practices (Barnett
& Monda-Amaya, 1998; Lindsay, Proulx, Scott, & Thomson, 2014). Niesyn (2009 as cited in
Cassady, 2011) found that teacher education training focuses on working with groups of students
in content areas with little attention given to individual differences or special needs, which
makes trainings and other strategies necessary to help teachers work effectively to best educate
students with disabilities in their classrooms. Some noted problems that teachers encounter
include overwhelming workloads and insufficient support and training, which suggests that
college-level teacher programs should include more preparation and practice for teaching
students with disabilities (Cassady, 2011). In fact, teachers with college-level professional
development appeared to have a more positive approach and confidence in meeting the
requirements of students IEPs (Avramidis et al., 2000). The area of supplementary college
courses to address special education and inclusion being necessary is a conversation for another
time, but something that should be explored and implemented.
Since college preparatory programs are not adequately preparing teacher candidates for
inclusive practices then school districts must fill the void. Mandatory trainings and extensive
professional development opportunities concerning how to accommodate the special needs of
students with disabilities is necessary for teachers to be successful when including these students
(Cassady, 2011; Weller, 2012). Exposure to special-education concepts and trainings were
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 35

associated with more positive attitudes towards inclusion for teachers and administrators
(Praisner, 2003; Williams, 2015). Furthermore, teachers without training demonstrate negative
attitudes about inclusion, lack confidence in their instructional skills, and they escalate problem
behaviors in students with disabilities, which would be especially problematic for students with
autism and emotional behavioral disturbances (Iadarola et al., 2015; Weller, 2012). General-
education teachers and special educators who are responsible for instructing students with
disabilities in inclusion must be equipped with effective instructional strategies in order to
address their students’ needs. If teachers are not prepared, then maladaptive behaviors will
interfere with the successful inclusion of students with autism and emotional behavioral
disturbances in the general-education setting (Weller, 2012). Parents and teachers have
expressed concern that the lack of resources and training for teachers and special educators
affects student learning and well-being and that more formal training is needed for how to work
with students with disabilities appropriately (Iadarola et al., 2015; Lindsay et al., 2014).
Educators are constantly being challenged to learn about specific-teaching skills to best
meet the needs of a higher number of children with autism and emotional behavioral
disturbances in their classrooms; however, many study participants asserted they have had a
small amount of training in special education both in their coursework and in professional
development conferences (Loiacono & Valenti, 2010; Weller, 2012). This must be addressed
and corrected to best help teachers and improve students’ outcomes. Data from questionnaires
found that elementary principals’ and teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about inclusive classrooms
were the two strongest predictors of effective teaching behaviors in inclusive classrooms
(Harrower, 1999) which again show the importance of education and trainings.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 36

Challenges and Barriers to Inclusion
According to Avramidis et al. (2000), professionals’ attitudes may act to facilitate or
constrain the implementation of policies, such as inclusion, and the success of innovative and
challenging programs depend upon the cooperation and commitment of those most directly
involved, such as teachers and principals (Cassady, 2011). If key members of a transformational
process are not supportive of the principles of the process, then difficulties with the execution
and operation of the policy are to be expected (Boyle, Topping, Jindal-Snape, & Norwich, 2012).
Challenges and barriers for inclusion come in many different forms: training, space, support,
funding, and student difficulties are a few. However, the most frequently cited barrier to
inclusion are negative attitudes (Harrower, 1999).
An inclusive education places a lot of requirements and stress on teachers; so in order to
make inclusion successful, everyone involved must conclude that diversity is a valuable asset for
classrooms (Ferguson, 2014; Ramirez, 2006). This means that elementary teachers and
elementary principals must appreciate the skills and assets that students with disabilities provide
to their general-education classrooms. As stated earlier, a lack of training and experience can
have an extremely negative affect on the attitude of educators. These negative views and their
perceived inability to adequately support students with disabilities influence their interactions
with children who have disabilities (Cassady, 2011; Ferguson, 2014). Tensions that result from
an educators’ belief that they are unable to address students with disabilities needs, while
simultaneously teaching their remaining students, lead to negative attitudes toward inclusion and
a lack of instructional differentiation that may lead to a beneficial learning environment for all
students (Cassady, 2011). Along with a negative attitude, a lack of support and clear
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 37

expectations, can lead to negative educational experiences for students with disabilities and
create an additional challenge for inclusion (Ferguson, 2014; Lindsay et al., 2014).
Teachers and principals both feel they lack support for inclusive programs, which is a
barrier and challenge many schools and districts face. Teachers, both special education and
general education, acknowledge the need for skills that students with disabilities, such as social
skills, need to be taught in the general-education classroom but reason that they do not have the
necessary time or administrative support (Lewis et al., 1994). Teaching social skills would be an
adaptation to the typical content areas, which adds to the anxieties of teachers. Due to
insufficient training and support, teachers did not feel like they could feasibly teach the required
instruction and the modifications to adequately support the education of students with disabilities
(Cassady, 2011; Ferguson, 2014).
Similar to teachers, elementary principals do not feel that they have the necessary skills
and supports to include all students in the general-education setting. For example, in a study
done by Brotherson, Sheriff, Milburn, and Schertz (2001), principals stated that they want their
inclusion programs to be successful but they believe pieces of the “inclusion puzzle” are missing,
such as funding, additional space, and time. In fact, the majority of principals in a study done by
Barnett and Monda-Amaya (1998) expressed that adequate support services were not likely to be
provided and, therefore, they felt that pull-out programs were the most effective placements for
students with disabilities. Administrators further reported that their definition of inclusion
pertained to students who did not require significant modifications to achieve success and that
students who require extensive adaptations to the curriculum fell outside of their inclusion
definition (Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998). This inclusion definition becomes an even bigger
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 38

barrier for students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances, because these students
generally require more modifications and support in the general-education setting.
Students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances typically need more
individualized support, modifications to their curriculum, and behavioral accommodations.
There is little argument that students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances present
significant educational challenges and they have a difficult time meeting the behavioral
expectations in the classrooms and, often times, these challenges are amplified in the general-
education setting (Harris, 2009; Lewis et al., 1994). These challenges provide concerns to
general-education teachers who in an inclusive setting would be responsible for providing
instruction to these students. Teachers concerns revolve around students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances having behavioral outbursts, curriculum modifications, lack of
social skills, lack of training, and lack of supports (Cassady, 2011). These students have the
potential to dramatically affect the overall environment of the classroom because they exhibit
different, often maladaptive behaviors that require attention from professionals and possibly take
attention or concentration away from the other students. These challenges, of using new
teaching and behavioral strategies for students with autism and emotional behavioral
disturbances, make general-education teachers feel overwhelmed (Cassady, 2011).
Some of the barriers and challenges of inclusion that elementary principals and
elementary teachers face have been discussed, including staff attitudes, trainings, and supports.
Additionally, there are added challenges specifically for students with autism and emotional
behavioral disturbances, such as behavioral difficulties and curriculum modifications.
Appropriate educational opportunities for students with disabilities are one of the most crucial
challenges facing public education today (Harris, 2009). According to Elmore (2000), long-term
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 39

educational gains on a system-wide scale requires districts and central offices organize so that
they can develop, implement, and support successful inclusion. In order to make schools more
successful in including all students with disabilities, there will need to be changes in attitude,
organization, and instruction (Cohen, 2015).
Leadership Characteristics
Attitudes and Perceptions of Principals in Inclusion
There are multiple factors that contribute or hinder an inclusion program being
successful. An elementary principal’s attitude toward students with disabilities and including
them in general-education settings is one of the most important factors (Cohen, 2015). The
school principal must be supportive of and display a positive attitude toward and a commitment
to inclusion in order to make it successful (Praisner, 2003). A survey of 408 elementary
principals conducted by Praisner (2003) found that 1 in 5 attitudes toward inclusion were
positive, while the majority remained uncertain. Findings from a study conducted by Cohen
(2015) showed that the greater amount of teaching experience related to negative attitudes
toward inclusion. This finding is not surprising considering that those who have been in
education for a long time did not have any coursework in special education and often no
experience with students with disabilities in their classrooms. More negative attitudes about
inclusion are present when education, training, and experience are not obtained.
Since elementary principals are in a leadership position their attitudes about inclusion
could result in either increased opportunities for students with disabilities in the general-
education setting or in limited energies spent to reduce segregation of special-education services
(Praisner, 2003). To ensure inclusion success, elementary principals must advance the
acceptance and success of students with disabilities in the general-education setting. Elementary
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 40

principals’ ability to advance and facilitate an effective inclusion program is influenced by their
attitudes as well as their support of teachers who are implementing any accommodations that are
needed for student success (Cassady, 2011; Weller, 2012). Elementary principals also need to be
cognizant that their attitudes towards inclusion does not just affect the programs’ success, their
teachers’ attitudes, and their placement decisions. The attitude of the principal is also critical
because typically developing peers often model the attitudes and behaviors of the adults around
them, such as teachers and principals (Lindsay et al., 2014; Williams, 2015)
Parents and teachers believe that elementary principals are instrumental in accepting and
developing inclusion in general-education classrooms (Iadarola et al., 2015; Weller 2012). This
is especially true for students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances, which are
disabilities that are growing rapidly and that have had the most difficult time being placed and
accepted in general-education settings. The elementary principals’ attitude, actions, and the
degree to which they support change efforts toward inclusion, specifically for students with
autism and emotional behavioral disturbances, affect the value of the inclusive experience
(Cassady, 2011; Ramirez, 2006; Praisner, 2003; Weller, 2012). One of the many actions that
elementary principals take with regards to inclusion programs is the placement of students with
disabilities in the general-education settings. Studies have found that more positive attitudes
toward including students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances is associated with
experiences with disabled students, administrative support, and trainings/education in special
education (Harris, 2009; Praisner, 2003; Weller, 2012).
How principals perceive the meaning of inclusion as well as how they feel students with
autism and emotional behavioral disturbances will affect or disrupt the education of other
students will affect their willingness to include all students. For example, elementary school
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 41

principals believe certain disabilities, such as those that “fit in” academically and those without
emotional or social needs are more appropriate for inclusive settings; however, it’s the
principals’ responsibility to develop a plan to ensure success for all students, even those with
social and emotional difficulties such as autism and emotional and behavioral disturbances
(Praisner, 2003; Weller, 2012). Establishing the meaning of inclusion and which students should
be included is a very difficult proposition for administrators. In a study conducted by Barnett
and Monda-Amaya (1998), principals most often chose the following three items as the most
essential for inclusion: supportive environment, shared responsibility, and cooperation. As
discussed earlier, students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances tend to be
segregated more than other disability categories, such as specific learning disability and speech
and language impairment. In a study done by Harris (2009), elementary principals
recommended more restrictive settings for most of the day for students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances as opposed to recommendations for students with specific
learning disabilities receiving instruction in the general-education setting with support and
resources (Harris, 2009). Between autism and emotional behavioral disturbance elementary
principals felt more confident implementing IEPs, adopting lessons, and collaborating to create
accommodations for a child with autism rather than a child with emotional behavioral
disturbance (Cassady, 2011). Principals and teachers view students with emotional behavioral
disturbances as causing more stress and concern than students with other disabilities, including
autism (Avramidis et al., 2000).
The success of implementing any organizational change depends on many things,
including positive experiences with students with disabilities and support within the school; the
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 42

first and foremost factor is the elementary principals’ leadership style, attitude, and ability to
adapt to different situations (Boyle et al., 2012; Cohen, 2015: Praisner, 2003).
Characteristics of Good Leaders
Inclusive practices are a major shift in education and, therefore, requires a strong leader.
Effective schools, including high-quality teaching, student-centered, and student progress
monitoring, are only made possible through strong school leadership (Döş & Savaş, 2015).
There is a strong, directly proportionate relationship between elementary principals and the
success and efficiency of the school and its students (Döş & Savaş, 2015; Praisner, 2003). A
strong leader can mean different things at different times in different situations, but a competent
and effective leader motivates, includes, and affects others to make them and the organization
successful.
Many researchers have developed and/or identified leadership traits that make someone a
good leader, specifically in times of change such as facilitating inclusive practices. These traits
include: providing support, having a vision and communicating that vision, motivating teachers
and students, establishing caring relationships, obtaining resources, adapting standard operating
procedures, monitoring the effort, and handling difficulties (Cohen, 2015; Döş & Savaş, 2015;
Mayrowetz & Weinstein, 1999). Elementary school principals should understand their
environment, their staff, their students, and be able to provide support when necessary.
In these times of change, having a good, strong leader is necessary to have a successful
school. Educators are facing a number of changes in addition to providing a more inclusive
educational experience for students, including Common Core State Standards and constant
changing technology, which necessitates that elementary principals provide a safe, positive
environment by creating a language of “us” and emphasize staff development (Döş & Savaş,
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 43

2015; Ryan, 2016). Because of all the changes that schools are going through, staff development
may be negatively affected and the focus of improving instruction may get put on the back
burner. Even with all of the expectation and changes, an effective, strong principal must
determine how to sufficiently educate their staff in regards to the inclusion of students with
autism and emotional behavioral disturbances (Williams, 2015).
Promoting the change to inclusion means that elementary principals possess the attitudes,
skills, and strategies to facilitate inclusion, such as promoting equity and the access of a quality
education to all students (Harris, 2009; Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2001). Strong leaders as
change agents are responsible for establishing shared beliefs, being an effective communicator,
sharing their visions with their staff, and the ability to support the change that is needed (Cohen,
2015; Marzano et al., 2001). In order to lead the implementation of a successful inclusionary
program, an elementary principal must believe that all students can learn, each student has a right
to learn, have high expectations of success, and support teachers (Barnett & Monda-Amaya,
1998; Cassady, 2011; Weller, 2012).
Past leadership, that was effective, is no longer appropriate during this time of change
and transformation. Current educational leaders need to strategically facilitate leadership
strategies that are transformational and asset based, including inspirational motivation and
individualized consideration (Ryan, 2016). Elementary principals must successfully lead true
transformational change by engaging all members of their organization if our educational system
is to remain relevant into the future (Powell, 2018).
Asset Based Lens of Ability
When an elementary principal views changes such as inclusion with an asset-based lens,
they identify the strengths and positives instead of the deficits. For example, when looking at
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 44

inclusion from an asset-based lens, educators would recognize that human differences are normal
and that the learning must adapt to the child rather than fitting the child into the education
process (Ferguson, 2014). Inclusive pedagogy includes viewing learning as a professional
challenge rather than as learner deficits (Lindsay et al., 2014). Unfortunately, McDonnell et al.
(2003) argued that the exclusion of students with disabilities results from a ‘deficit’ hypothesis,
which means that in education the problem is placed within the child and not the social structures
of our educational system. Educating from a deficit hypothesis means that teachers react to the
behavior and social deficits of students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances with
anger, frustration, and punishment instead of understanding that the behavior is because of their
diagnosed disorder as well as appreciating the gains that typical peers make because of their
increased contact with the student with disabilities (Cassady, 2011; Weller, 2012). The
elementary principal must use an asset-based lens to allow students with autism and emotional
behavioral disturbances to remain in general-education settings.
Transformational Leadership
Northouse (2007) describes a transformational leader as someone who implements a
process that changes an individual and transforms them from within. In the case of inclusion,
transformational leadership changes many individuals: students with disabilities, typical peers,
teachers, administrators, and parents. A transformational leader is necessary for a district and
school which is going through an educational reform, such as inclusion.
Transformational leaders push and motivate their members to a level that is higher than
their own expectations, they intellectually stimulate their members, and they have a charisma
that generates connection among the organization (Cohen, 2015; Northouse, 2007; Powell,
2018). Motivating and pushing members beyond their expectations is necessary when leading an
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 45

organization through inclusion because research has shown that many educators worry about
their lack of experience and knowledge when teaching students with disabilities so they will need
to be pushed and motivated to extend what they expect from themselves. Transformational
leaders are effective leaders who are concerned with doing what is right for their organization, in
this case their students, and who lead their members to become interconnected to get the job
done (Northouse, 2007; Webb II, 2011).
According to Ramaley (1996 as cited in Webb II, 2011), a leader must complete certain
duties in order to create transformational change such as: articulate a compelling case for change,
make the purpose of the change clear, formulate the amount of change that will be significant,
and assure that the environment is conducive to change. In terms of an elementary principal
being a transformational leader, means they need to explain the need for change; identify and
give the process of how the change will be implemented; and provide the resources that will be
needed to make the change possible. The leader must create and sustain a transformative
structure that embraces innovation, mutual accountability, accessibility to effective teachers, and
collaboration among stakeholders (Webb II, 2011; Weller, 2012).
In public schools, the educational change brought on by inclusion requires implementing
a program that is evidence-based, supporting the program with adequate resources and personnel,
minimizing barriers, examining the implementation results, and then discovering strategies that
will increase the willingness of general-education teachers to include students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances (Cassady, 2011; Webb II, 2011). Each step in the process is
imperative in creating a successful inclusion program, especially making sure the program is
provided with sufficient resources and personnel. The teachers’ impact on student learning has
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 46

become more evident and, therefore, an effective transformational leader must be a change agent
whose leadership qualities transforms the culture of the school (Webb II, 2011).
Summary
Inclusion programs are very important to the education of all students with disabilities,
specifically, those with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances. Special-education laws,
such as IDEIA (2004), mandate that students with disabilities be included in the general-
educational setting. However, there is no specific method for including these students and
different steps and kinds of inclusion have been created and implemented often with little
success. Past literature has found that barriers to successful inclusion include: lack of
professional development and trainings, support of personnel, and staff attitudes. A study
looking at the attitudes and perceptions of principals and how those attitudes affect their ability
to support students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances in a general-education
setting is necessary to identify strategies and leadership styles to improve inclusion programs.

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 47

Chapter Three: Methodology
This chapter includes a brief summary of the problem, purpose, review of the literature,
and research questions that guided this study. It also includes an overview of the study design,
participant description, setting, instrumentation, data collection procedures, and the methods of
data analysis. It concludes with a summary of the research methodology and preview of chapters
four and five.
Purpose of the Study
According to Ferguson (2014), the current educational policy of inclusive education
means that more children with disabilities and special-education needs are being placed in
mainstream education instead of separate schools. However, even though elementary school
leaders need to take the lead to best incorporate students with disabilities, including autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances, in general-education classes research has shown that often
they are not prepared to facilitate this transition and they don’t know their role in the
implementation. The purpose of this study is to develop a better understanding of the attitudes
and perceptions of elementary principals around helping teachers and how they provide support
to teachers who are including students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances.
Research Questions
The following research questions helped guide the study:
1. What perceptions do elementary principals have about their ability to help teachers who
are educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive
setting?
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 48

2. What support does kindergarten through fifth grade elementary principals provide
teachers when educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an
inclusive setting?
3. What perceptions do elementary teachers have about their principals’ ability to help them
educate students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
4. What kind of support do elementary teachers need from their principals when educating
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
Methodology
This study used an explanatory, sequential mixed-methods design, which is a procedure
for collecting and analyzing both quantitative and qualitative data to understand the research
problem more completely (Creswell, 2002). The researcher collected quantitative data through
surveys, analyzed the results, and then built the qualitative data through interviews. The purpose
of qualitative research in an exploratory, sequential design is to explain the results of the
quantitative data by understanding how participants engage with their world and make sense of
their lives and experiences.
For this study, the researcher surveyed elementary principals to examine factors that may
predict a successful inclusion program and then followed that survey up with qualitative
interviews of elementary teachers and elementary principals about the principals’ ability to help
and support general-education teachers as part of an inclusionary program.
Sample and Population
The researcher sent surveys to 50 elementary principals and interviewed five elementary
principals and five teachers. Both convenience and purposive sampling procedures were used
for this study. Convenience sampling was done for the quantitative data collection because of
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 49

the participants’, elementary principals, availability (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). According to
Maxwell (2013), purposive (purposeful) sampling is used when a particular setting or people are
deliberately selected to provide information that is relevant to the research questions. In this
study, purposive sampling was used for the qualitative data collection because the researcher
wanted to discover, understand, and gain insight from a select group, elementary principals and
teachers, (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) about the attitudes, perceptions, and abilities of principals to
support teachers in an inclusive setting.
Selection criteria for this study were used for both principals and teachers (see Table 1).
Principals were required to be an elementary school principal for at least three years and teachers
needed at least three years of teaching experience at the elementary level. Principals and
teachers were sampled from elementary schools throughout the suburbs of Los Angeles County
in southern California. For the survey portion of the study, principals were selected by sending
out an online survey to elementary principals within the study’s area (suburbs of Los Angeles
County) along with a cover letter explaining the study and asking for their participation (see
Appendix A). Interview participants were selected from the districts within the study’s area
(suburbs of Los Angeles County). Principals interview participants were selected using a
purposive sampling technique, teacher participants were selected using a convenience sampling
technique in order to interview principals and teachers from the same school.
Instrumentation
Quantitative
Surveys were used to collect quantitative data about the attitudes and perceptions of
principals around students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders and the supports
needed by teachers who are including these students. The cross-sectional survey design, which
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 50

entailed that data was collected at one point in time, was used (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Surveys were used to elicit information about attitudes that are difficult to measure through
observational techniques (McIntyre, 2011); in this case, principals’ perceptions of students with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders and the supports needed by their teachers. The self-
developed questionnaire contains three different question formats: Likert-scale questions,
information questions, and open-ended questions; all of which focused on the research questions.
Part I of the survey consisted of four informational questions, part II consisted of 25 Likert-scale
questions, and part III consisted of one open-ended question requesting three different responses.
The survey was field tested among elementary principals to secure the content validity and
internal consistency of the instrument (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Surveys were administered
to 50 elementary school principals via SurveyMonkey who fit the study criteria in an email with
a cover letter explaining the study, a total of 29 principals responded. The survey was designed
to provide a numeric description of the attitudes and perceptions of principals’ ability to support
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in general-education classrooms
(Creswell, 2009).
Qualitative
Based on the information gathered from the surveys, qualitative data was then collected
through interviews with teachers and principals with the purpose of better understanding and
explaining the survey results (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The first set of semi-structured
interviews were completed to gain a deeper understanding and insight from teachers about the
supports they require when including students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders as
well as their perceptions about their principals’ ability to provide those supports. A second set of
semi-structured interviews were completed with principals to discover and understand the
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 51

supports needed by teachers including students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders
in their classrooms and their own perceived ability to provide those needed supports.
In accordance with Merriam and Tisdell (2016), the following strategies were used to
increase the credibility and reliability of the findings: data triangulation, method triangulation,
and member checking. Triangulation of the data and triangulation of the methods were used to
increase the credibility and the quality of the findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Data
triangulation was accomplished by comparing the data that was collected from multiple
principals with different perspectives. Method triangulation was achieved by checking what was
gained from interviews against what the literature revealed. Increasing credibility was also
accomplished by member checking and by soliciting feedback from principals and teachers that
were interviewed, which is the best way to rule out misinterpreting the meaning of what was said
(Maxwell, 2013). In addition to employing these three areas of findings, two theories, asset-
based theory and transformational leadership, were utilized as a method for connecting the
findings to larger perspectives.
Conceptual Framework
The change of educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an
inclusive setting requires an asset-based, transformational leader (see Figure 2). An asset-based
leader focuses on the strengths, values, and intellectual stimulation for each student.
Additionally, they view diversity in thought, culture, and traits as positive assets that predicate a
growth mindset for each student. This means that an asset-based leader empowers students with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders and views those students as bringing value and
potential to each classroom. These views are necessary from elementary school principals to
meet the inclusion mandates of IDEIA (2004), which require that schools educate students with
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 52

disabilities in the regular education classroom to the maximum extent appropriate. Similar to an
asset-based educator, a transformational leader takes each individual into consideration. A
transformational leader inspires and motivates teachers and students by leading by example and
creating connections among the school, family, and community to foster cooperation and
influence others throughout this transformation process (Bolman & Deal, 1991).
Transformational leadership is necessary to lead elementary school staff through establishing a
more inclusive educational experience for students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders.
Data Collection Procedures
The quantitative data was collected by using measurements on the Likert scale to develop
knowledge and create hypotheses for the qualitative interviews (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
The Likert scale was used to measure the attitudes and perceptions of elementary principals
regarding students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders and the principals’ ability to
help general-education teachers include these students in their classrooms. The Likert scale was
measured on a scale from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree.’ The surveys were administered
via SurveyMonkey to 50 elementary principals who fit the study criteria in an email with a cover
letter explaining the study (see Appendix A for cover letter). A follow-up email was sent 10
days after the initial email with an additional survey link to any remaining principals.
For this study, data was collected in two distinct phases, with the qualitative data built
directly on the quantitative results (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Interviews were conducted with
five elementary principals and five elementary teachers. Based on the results from the
quantitative surveys about attitudes, perceptions, and the needs of students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders qualitative, data was collected to discover factors that we would
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 53

not be able to observe (Patton, 1980). Principal interview participants were ascertained from
survey respondents and teacher interview participants were located via a convenience sample in
districts in which surveys were dispersed. Each interview was conducted on a voluntary basis.
Interviews were conducted face to face at the desired location of the participants; usually
their classrooms or offices. Interviews were utilized as a way to gather descriptive data in the
subjects’ own words and from their own perspective (Bogdan & Biklen 1997; Patton, 1980).
Additionally, as per research conducted by Creswell and Creswell (2018) and Bogdan and Biklen
(1997), interviews were employed for this study so that the researcher could develop insights on
how those immersed in the setting, in this case principals and general-education teachers,
interpreted, valued, and perceived their world. The goal of each interview wato understand how
each person thinks in regards to students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders being
included in general-education classrooms (Bogdan & Biklen, 1997).
Semi-structured interviews were performed with the intent to elicit views and opinions
from participants based on the investigatory work from the survey data (Bogdan & Biklen, 1997;
Creswell & Creswell, 2018). A further purpose of using a semi-structured interview was to get
more comparable data from the same questions and to focus on that particular data (Bogdan &
Biklen, 1997). Given permission by each interviewee, each interview was audio recorded and
field notes were taken throughout the interview in order to formulate new and probing questions
to gather details, particulars, and further exploration (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Patton, 1980).
Additionally, prior to each interview, consent was given to the researcher by interviewees who
comprehended that their answers would be held strictly confidential (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007).
Each interview took an average of 45 minutes to complete and follow-up phone calls were
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 54

conducted as necessary to clarify any pertinent information targeting research questions. The
researcher transcribed and reviewed all interviews.
Data Analysis
This study used a mixed-method approach, integrating both quantitative and qualitative
data. All items from the survey and interview questions were mapped to the research questions
and the research questions guided the data analysis for the study.
Quantitative data was collected through principal surveys and were analyzed using
descriptive data–mean, standard deviation, and range of scores–and checked for consistency
using Cronbach’s alpha. Then, qualitative data was collected through teacher and principal
interviews. The rationale for this approach was that the quantitative data results provided a
general picture of the research problem; for example, What are some of the supports that teachers
need and if principals are able to provide those supports?, while the qualitative data and its
analysis refine and explain those results by exploring the participants’ views more in-depth.
Initial qualitative data analysis was conducted throughout the data collection process by
memo writing on the topics and responses raised during the interviews and their relation to the
larger issues (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Additionally, the data analysis was initiated by
organizing and managing all data points through coding, meaning short-hand was used, to
designate various features so specific pieces were able to be easily retrieved (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). This open coding strategy led to a deeper interpretation and reflection coding process,
called analytical coding, which led to category construction (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Richards,
2014). These categories were developed from recurring responses and patterns throughout the
interviews and were used to answer the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 55

researcher ensured the confidentiality of each participant was preserved throughout the entire
process.
Validity and Reliability
The researcher made every effort to have a valid and reliable study by following Patton’s
(1980) belief that a study should be completed with intellectual rigor, professional integrity, and
methodological competence. Additionally, potential threats to validity were avoided by utilizing
the following strategies: triangulation in the data collection, researcher self-reflecting on
assumptions/biases, getting “rich data” from interviews and memos, and feedback from member
checking (Maxwell, 1996; Merriam, 2009).
Summary
This study used a mixed-method approach to collect quantitative data from surveys and
qualitative data from interviews. The data collected from elementary principals and elementary
teachers were analyzed to target the four research questions: perceptions of elementary principals
about their ability to help teachers include students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders, perceptions of elementary teachers about their principals’ ability to help them educate
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders, what kind of support do elementary
teachers need from their principals, and what support do elementary principals provide for their
teachers. These findings have been presented in chapter four, with a discussion of the findings in
chapter five.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 56

Chapter 4: Findings
Introduction
The development of the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 1997) has
directed the implementation of inclusion programs across the nation. Many variables that
contribute to an inclusion programs’ success have not been adequately researched, such as the
effects of an elementary principals’ perceptions, attitudes, and supports on inclusionary practices
(Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998; Ferguson, 2014). Based on the transformational leadership
theory (Northouse, 2017), the main purpose was to study the attitudes and perceptions of
elementary principals regarding helping teachers and how they provide support to teachers who
are including students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances. The perceptions and
supports of elementary principals was looked at through the theory of principals as
transformational leaders. Transformational leadership gives attention to the charismatic and
affective elements of leadership (Northouse, 2017). According to this theory, transformational
leaders who demonstrate these charismatic elements have followers who trust their ideology,
identify with the leader, and who show affection toward their leader. A transformational leader
has the ability to change and transform people, by getting them emotionally involved and
providing a leader who gives them increased confidence (Northouse, 2017). This is especially
true of principals who are leading a school through a change that requires collaboration among
multiple staff members and disciplines, as is the case for including students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances. Lastly, transformational leaders strive to inspire followers
while also understanding the need to adapt to the needs and motives of their followers
(Northouse, 2017). Principals who are introducing inclusion and/or expanding the level of
inclusion practices at their schools need to make their staff feel and believe that they will be able
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 57

to achieve this goal, while also listening to and acting on the needs of the staff. In order to be a
transformational leader, principals must know their own attitudes, perceptions of inclusion, and
understand how to best support their staff.
The results and findings from this research, specifically focusing on elementary principals’
attitudes, and perceptions of inclusion, and their ability to help teachers who are including
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders, will be presented in this chapter.
Originated results provide valuable information regarding policies and practices for elementary
schools to create successful inclusion programs through support, professional development, and
a culture of transformational leadership and growth to meet the unique needs of all students.
Lastly, this chapter concludes with a discussion of the findings.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to develop a better understanding of the attitudes and
perceptions of elementary principals regarding helping teachers and how they provide support to
teachers who are including students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances. This
study was done as an explanatory, sequential mixed-methods design. The researcher used an
explanatory, sequential mixed-method design to collect quantitative data and analyze the results
from elementary principals to gain a better understanding of where the qualitative portion needed
to be directed. An advantage of this approach is that the researcher was able to identify areas of
concern and areas of strength from elementary principals surrounding inclusion for students with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders. Additionally, the study allowed the researcher to
examine some factors that may predict a successful inclusion program and then dive deeper into
those factors through interviews with elementary principals and teachers.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 58

Presentation of Findings
This chapter commences with the exploration of the two main components of research;
first, a depiction of the survey respondents and interview subjects and second, a descriptive
analysis of the findings is provided as they address the guiding research questions.
Research Questions
1. What perceptions do elementary principals have about their ability to help teachers who
are educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive
setting?
2. What support does kindergarten through fifth grade elementary principals provide
teachers when educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an
inclusive setting?
3. What perceptions do elementary teachers have about their principals’ ability to help them
educate students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
4. What kind of support do elementary teachers need from their principals when educating
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
Organization of Data Analysis
The data analysis begins with a characteristic description of the survey respondents and
interview subjects. The following sections include a detailed analysis of the findings for each
research question. Extrapolating the quantitative data, a qualitative research design was then
employed using two data sources: elementary principal and elementary teacher interviews.
These sources were used in combination with the theory of transformational leadership to
triangulate findings through a cross comparison of collected data. Gathering, analyzing, and
interpreting the data acquired through survey responses and interviews was done to expand upon
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 59

current research and to create hypotheses for further studies regarding elementary principals’
attitudes, perceptions, and their ability to help their teachers who are including students with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders.
Descriptive Characteristics
Survey Participants
The researcher sent an email to elementary principals within Los Angeles County. The
email explained the purpose, importance, and the ethical considerations of the study; the email
also stated that their participation was completely voluntary, provided the researcher’s contact
information if they had any questions, and provided a link to the survey which was completed
anonymously. A follow-up email was sent to each survey respondent 10 days after the first
email. A total of 172 surveys and follow-up emails were sent to elementary principals with a
total of 25 surveys returned. A reliability analysis was carried out on the 22 Likert style items
from the survey. Cronbach’s alpha showed the survey reached an acceptable reliability, α =
0.97. Table 2 summarizes the respondents’ information:
The survey responses were used to create the interview questions for both principals and
teachers. Each survey question was answered on a four-point Likert scale from strongly disagree
to strongly agree. Strongly disagree is equivalent to one point, disagree is equivalent to two
points, agree is equivalent to three points, and strongly agree is equivalent to four points. Table
3 lists the questions that were most valuable in creating the interview questions along with the
mean and standard deviation for each question. As evidenced by the responses shown in Table
3, interview questions were concentrated on the areas of trainings, resources/materials, and
support provided by elementary principals for their teachers who are including students with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders in the general education classroom.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 60

Interview Participants
Interviews were conducted with five elementary principals and five elementary teachers.
Interviews were created based on survey responses, and were done with the purpose of
developing a better understanding of elementary principals’ attitudes and perceptions of students
with autism and emotional behavioral disorders being included in general education as well as
their ability to help their teachers who are including these students. All interviews were
completed using a semi-structured protocol for questions. Each interview was audio recorded
with the participant’s permission. Questions ranged from years in education to ideal educational
perspective to the advantages and disadvantages of children with autism and emotional
behavioral disorders being included in general education classrooms. Each participant was
interviewed in their classroom (teachers) and office (principal). The interviews lasted an average
of 29 minutes, with the longest interview lasting 58 minutes and the shortest interview lasting 17
minutes.
All principals that were interviewed had been teachers prior to being a principal and three
had other roles within education such as instructional aides, teacher on special assignment, and
assistant principal. Tables 4 and 5 summarize the principals’ and teachers’ interview
information:
According to Maxwell’s (2013) recommendations for qualitative data analyses, the
following strategies were used to create commonalities among the participants’ responses:
reading, listening, and reflecting upon the interview transcripts, writing memos, and creating
codes. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) defined codes as the process of making notations next to the
interview data that may possibly be relevant in addressing the research questions. Using the
process of grouping open codes into themes and using individual interpretations and reflections
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 61

of their meanings created relevant concepts which were developed into assertions (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Filtering through the data to find common themes and integrating germane
information into meanings to help formulate answers to the research questions (Bogdan &
Biklen, 2007). Additionally, the following strategies were used to increase the credibility and
reliability of the findings: data triangulation among different interview participants, method
triangulation by comparing data versus what the literature revealed, and member checking by
soliciting feedback from interview participants (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As
the data increasingly uncovered rich information, a variety of relevant constructs were
discovered: resources, trainings, supports, growth mindset, and building relationships.
Findings
Research Question 1
What perceptions do elementary principals have about their ability to help teachers who
are educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive
setting?
Research question 1 was queried using a semi-structured interview to gain a sense of
what the elementary principals believed regarding inclusion at their school. Interviews were
used to generate a deep and rich portrayal of the participants’ perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes
regarding inclusion and their ability to support that inclusion. Research question 1 was intended
to learn about the principals’ beliefs about inclusion, the most difficult parts regarding inclusion,
and the levels and kinds of trainings/professional development they have received regarding
inclusion. This question helped transition directly into research question 2 which sought to
identify the supports that principals provide their general education teachers. Principals equated
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 62

four different concepts that related to their ability to help teachers: inclusion, teachers’ reception
to inclusion, difficult parts to inclusion, and trainings/professional developments for staff.
Inclusion
Research has shown that principals’ attitudes influence the strength of programs, such as
inclusion. Based on interview responses, principals in this study felt that an inclusion program is
a necessary component of public education and, therefore, they believed it’s their responsibility
to support their teachers who are including students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders. For example, Principal A stated:
I do believe in the least restrictive environment . . .. I think it’s a good thing for them.
As long . . . as they’re capable and as long as they are suited for a general education
environment, give them a shot and see how they fare.
Principal E stated “we like to mainstream into general education . . . we constantly talk about the
fact that special education shouldn’t be a destination . . . general education is always the place
where we want to be at.”
However, the researcher found that principals also believed they are not able to provide
the needed supports because of time, money, and lack of personnel supports. For example,
Principal B said “I think they need paraeducator support, I really do. Not to make them
dependent, but for the purpose of accessing . . . our district is very stingy on the personnel piece
and I get it, it’s budget.” Principal C said “in some of the situations I’ve had, adding additional
personnel just so that way they can help facilitate some of these opportunities” and Principal A
stated:
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 63

I think we are doing the best we can with what we have, and it’s not the best scenario.
It’s not the best situation. We’re doing the best we can, but it’s not enough support, both
for the teachers and the students.
Teachers’ Reception to Inclusion
The passage of IDEA (1975) required that supports and services need to be brought to the
students in general education settings instead of students moving to a separate setting. This
indicates that teachers need to be understanding and receptive to these students. When principals
were asked about their teachers’ level of reception regarding including students, principals felt
that most teachers were only receptive when they were given supports, such as an aid, because as
general education teachers they don’t feel prepared due to a lack of training and education to
teach these students. For example, Principal A stated:
I think the ones [teachers] that disagree [with having students included in their class] it
goes back to “I don’t know how to help these children, and therefore you give me these
students who have additional needs and I don’t know how to support them. Therefore, I
don’t feel comfortable having them in my classroom.”
Additionally, Principal B stated “I think that most of them would say that they would be
somewhat amenable to it, but their next question will be, but he comes with an aide, right?”
Principal E further declared “most of the time [when teachers are asked to include students] it’s a
lot of fear and again because we haven’t done a good job of training our staff.”
Difficult Part of Inclusion
Research by Niesyn (2009 as cited in Cassady, 2011) found that teacher education
focuses on working with student groups and little attention is given to individual differences or
special needs. When principals were asked what area(s) they perceive as the most difficult part
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 64

in helping to support their teachers who are including students with autism and emotional
behavioral disorders, they responded that helping teachers differentiate instruction for special
education students and dealing with the students’ behavioral difficulties were two biggest areas
of difficulty. Principal A replied “the two biggest areas of need, accommodations differentiated
instruction . . . secondly, I think is how do I handle behavior?” Principal E expressed “I think
one of the big things is that having a clear understanding of how to adjust the work for students
so that it’s still rigorous . . . we struggle with teachers making those adjustments.”
Trainings/PD’s for Teachers/Staff
Successful inclusion requires trainings and in-services about special education for
principals and their staff (Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998; Cohen, 2015). Unfortunately, the last
problem that was discovered by the researcher when asking principals about their ability to
support their teachers was a lack of trainings and professional development about inclusion.
None of the principals in this study stated they had received specific training from their district
regarding inclusion supports and that trainings around special education consists only of legal
compliance and timelines. Principal A stated,
I can’t recall any recent trainings, PD’s regarding that [inclusion] . . . most of the sped
[special education] trainings that are given to us more has to do with legal issues, case
law, going over timelines, not necessarily how to support children.
Principal B declared that “the only thing that is recent . . . it’s more the legal aspects of special
education law and all of education code and stuff like that.” Principal D said. “not really the
inclusion part yet, and I say yet because I think if I complain enough, right?” Principal E
responded that “again, none. I’m reading material, I’m looking for it because I’m trying to
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 65

support a teacher so I’m doing research on my own. There’s never been an actual in-service on
inclusion or things of that nature.”
Research Question 2
What support does kindergarten through fifth grade elementary principals provide
teachers when educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an
inclusive setting?
Research question 2 was probed using a semi-structured interview and sought to identify
the supports that principals provide their general education teachers. Interviews were utilized to
generate a profound and vivid portrayal of the participants’ beliefs about their ability to support
general education teachers to create a successful inclusion program. Principals mentioned
multiple different areas or kinds of support that teachers require including paraeducator support,
being present and listening, and trainings. In addition, principals were asked how well they are
able to support their staff, not regarding inclusion, to understand their perceptions concerning
their overall level of support.
Paraeducator Support
In a study by Barnett and Monda-Amaya (1998), the majority of principals expressed that
adequate support services, such as paraeducators, were not likely to be provided; however, the
support most often cited by principals requested by their teachers was paraeducator support. For
example, Principal C stated “in some of the situations that I’ve had, adding additional personnel
just so that way they can help facilitate some of those opportunities;” and Principal E said
“providing some support . . . a one-to-one aide.” However, principals that were interviewed also
felt that providing a paraeducator as a support was one of the most difficult supports to provide,
along with resources and trainings. Principal A stated “I find it more difficult when I don’t have
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 66

any resources or support to offer them . . . we’ve exhausted all the resources that are available to
us at the time.” Additionally, Principal B explained, “I don’t have the tangible solutions that
they want, whether it’s the personnel or I can’t release them to give them some sort of training;”
and Principal E asserted that the most difficult support to provide is
trying to provide some staff development, while still being with the district staff
development days and all the things we have to do . . . providing the time for teachers to
get comfortable with the differentiation piece, the time management piece, and the
behavioral management piece.
Being Present
Research by Northouse (2007), Powell (2018), and Cohen (2015) showed that leaders
who are transformational, which is necessary for a school/district to have a successful inclusion
program, push and motivate their members, and have a charisma that generates connection
among the organization. Principals providing support for teachers by being present, listening,
and supporting through relationship building and personal connections develop generating
connections and motivations. Principal A articulated that often support means providing “a lot
of encouragement, motivation, having them come in and then using you as a sounding board, and
provide them with support.” Principal C indicated, “I try to connect on a personal level . . .
we’re trying to teach empathy for the kids, but it’s also empathy for the adults.” Principal D
conveyed that when a teacher is including a student she will “sit with the teacher and tell you
why . . . I’ll be here, you’ve seen me in your room . . . it’s a lot of ‘I’ll be here.” Lastly, Principal
E expressed,
providing those reassurances to the teacher saying “hey it’s okay it’s not going to go well,
we’re going to have some bumps in the road. Just call me. We’re here to support” and
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 67

making myself available to those teachers. We’re there to either provide support, or
figure something out for them, and make those adjustments as needed.
Trainings
The success and failure of programs, such as inclusion, depends on the training of
administrators and, in turn, how well they are able to train their staff which is an area of
weakness towards creating a successful inclusion program. Principals feel they need to provide
their teachers trainings in the areas of special education and inclusion. For example, Principal A
declared “I think training is absolutely a necessary component” and Principal B corroborated that
need by stating
I think it all goes to training, because we have to think about my general ed teachers.
Most of them don’t need to do a lot of visual cues for kids . . . they’re not familiar with
token reinforcement systems.
However, even though the principals communicated the need for support in the form of
trainings, they also acknowledged they haven’t been able to provide those supports. For
example, Principal A avowed that “we need professional development to broaden our knowledge
base and to teach staff how to deal with and how to support our children” and Principal E
asserted that providing trainings is,
a tough part because finding staff development that provides teachers with that kind of
information [inclusion] it comes at a premium. Seldom do you ever see it . . . I don’t
think we are doing enough to make sure that our teachers are getting trained for that kind
of stuff.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 68

Overall Level of Support
The success and failures of creating inclusive policies and programs depends on the
school administrators’ ability to support their staff through this transition (Harris, 2009).
Principals were asked how well they were able to support their staff overall, not just specifically
in the area of the inclusion or special education. Principals identified that they were supportive
to their staff overall; however, when it came to inclusion/special education, they believed they
were less effective. Principal A declared,
in the realm of special education, I don’t think I’ve done a very good job of supporting
staff or supporting teachers. On the other hand, if they need support in terms of
curriculum, in terms of accommodating, in terms of breaking down standards. I feel
much more comfortable offering support in that area.
Principal D stated,
On a scale of 1-10, I think I’m able to support our teachers at like a seven, pretty high.
Again my hands get . . . I kind of get . . . the bureaucracy of special education kind of
freezes me up and doesn’t let me do what I think we should do or can’t get the help that I
feel like we can get.
Research Question 3
What perceptions do elementary teachers have about their principals’ ability to help
them educate students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive
setting?
Research question 3, similar to research question 1, is looking at the perceptions of
elementary teachers and were queried using a semi-structured interview to gain a sense of what
the elementary teachers believe regarding inclusion at their school. Interviews were used to
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 69

generate a deep and rich portrayal of the participants’ perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes
regarding inclusion and their ability to support that inclusion. Research question 3 was intended
to learn about the teachers’ perceptions about their principals’ ability to help them with
inclusion. This question helped transition directly into research question 4 which sought to
identify the supports that teachers request and require from their principals when including
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in their classrooms. Teachers linked
three different areas that hindered their principals’ ability to provide sufficient support:
bureaucracy, training, and money/personnel.
Bureaucracy
A study conducted by Harris (2009), found that inclusion is important and must be
supported by trained personnel in order to meet each student’s needs. Unfortunately, teachers
believed that district policies/bureaucracy hinders their principals’ ability to support them with
trained personnel. The principals’ inability to provide support due to district bureaucracy and
policies was illustrated by Teacher A when she stated “it’s not the principals fault, I think the
principals’ hands are tied as well. I think the principal gives us as much support as the principal
possibly can.” Teacher E stated.
in terms of really getting for that student what they need legally . . . that’s so hard
because there’s such a long waiting list . . . this is what we as a district are able to provide
for them right now, and it’s unfortunate that there isn’t more and I wish that there was.
Training
Studies conducted by Iadarola et al. (2015) and Lindsay et al. (2014), found that teachers
and parents have expressed concern that the lack of training and resources for special educators
affects student learning and well being and that more formal training is necessary to work for
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 70

students with disabilities appropriately. Based on interviews, teachers concurred that their
principals’ ability to support them is obstructed by a lack of training regarding inclusion.
Teacher C stated,
I feel like my particular current principal is trying really hard but . . . most general
education teachers are not trained specifically in these areas, and I feel like they’re
overwhelmed and they just throw their hands up . . . the principal themself is not trained
properly.
This point was expanded by Teacher B when she expressed “you might go for help and
it’s always, well what can you do? I would probably like more maybe classes or trainings on
helping students and teaching students that have those needs.” Additionally, teachers stated that
although the principals were supportive they were not able to provide the necessary supports
because they lacked sufficient training regarding inclusion and/or they were not able to get
‘experts’ to provide the needed supports. Teacher A explained,
she’s very supportive . . . I mean what she’s able to do . . . I try to use her as a last resort.
I think I will usually go to our FCC teachers or our RSP teachers or our intervention
coach before I go to her.
Teacher B stated,
I can see the need that a student has, but I don’t always have a way to get it. I’m not
really an expert on those things too. The teacher is usually the facilitator, the one that’s
creating some way to fix the situation or help the situation. It would be nice to have
someone to talk to about it and the tools necessary.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 71

Lastly, Teacher C indicated,
The principal themself is not really trained properly. The supports they do offer, it
doesn’t usually fix whatever the issues are for the classroom. Sometimes they’ll be like,
we’ll offer you a training online and you can watch this movie about students on the
spectrum or something. Then it’s all supposed to be fixed and the teacher’s still like, I
still don’t know what to do.
Money/Personnel
In a study conducted by Brotherson et al. (2001), principals believed that there are
missing pieces in creating a successful inclusion program such as funding, space, and time. Four
of the five teachers who were interviewed mentioned funding difficulties and areas that arise
from lack of funding such as personnel support impede a principals’ ability to support their
teachers. For example, Teacher A acknowledged that money and personnel makes it difficult on
the principal by saying, “I mean I think she would . . . again I think she would give me whatever
I needed as long as that was feasible from this district.” In regards to money and personnel,
Teacher B declared,
I don’t think the principal always have . . . she doesn’t have personnel resources. I would
say the support is the hugest issue and make sure that we have more than one person in
the room to help kids.
Teacher C voiced that “getting actual personnel to help, like an aide to come . . . because
of funding or whatever, it’s really hard to have extra assistants that are available to help with
inclusion.” Teacher E articulated,
I don’t think it’s because the principal doesn’t want to, there’s just not enough people . . .
so in terms of the ability of the administration to support us in that, it’s really hard, but
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 72

there aren’t the people there to help do the things . . . if there were more money, there
would be more people to help with things like that and give kids what they need so that
the learning can happen.
Research Question 4
What kind of support do elementary teachers need from their principals when educating
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
Research question 4 was probed using a semi-structured interview and sought to identify
the supports that teachers require from their principals. Interviews were utilized to generate a
profound and vivid portrayal of the participants’ beliefs about their principals’ ability to provide
sufficient support to create a successful inclusion program. Teachers mentioned multiple
different areas or kinds of support that they require including paraeducator support, trainings,
and equipment/materials. In addition, teachers were asked their ideas about inclusion, if teachers
were willing to have students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders, and if they have
received any trainings regarding inclusion. In addition, teachers were asked how well supported
they are by their principals overall, not regarding inclusion, in order to understand their
perceptions concerning their overall level of support.
Needed Supports
In studies done by Cohen (2015) and Praisner (2003), they found a positive correlation
between special education trainings and positive attitudes and competencies toward inclusion.
Regrettably it was found based on teacher interviews, they are not receiving those trainings and
equipment/materials/tools to support students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders
being included in their classrooms. For example, when asked what supports they needed
Teacher A exclaimed “Training, training for me. Same for them” and Teacher B indicated,
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 73

I don’t feel like I have enough of the tools. I can see what a student has, but I don’t
always have the way to get it. I’m not really an expert on those things too. The teacher is
usually the facilitator, the one that’s creating some way to fix the situation or help the
situation. It would be nice to have someone to talk to about it and the tools necessary.
Inclusion/Willingness to Include Students
Teachers who lack inclusion training lack confidence in their skills, escalate students’
problem behaviors, and demonstrate negative attitudes about inclusion (Iadarola et al., 2015;
Weller, 2012). Teachers were probed about their and their colleagues’ feelings about inclusion
and their willingness to have students included in their classrooms. Overall, teachers felt that
inclusion was appropriate and that some teachers were willing, especially when given a
paraeducator. In regards to the willingness to include students Teacher C answered,
I think I’m very open to it. Basically, the more the better. I feel like we need support
staff that is specially trained to support students on the spectrum or just special needs
students in general, when they come into typical classrooms.
Teacher B stated, “the situation is usually better the more support I have . . . it’s really helpful
[when] you have a person.” Additionally, Teacher C believed that her colleagues were
“somewhat receptive because I feel like they think it’s not their expertise, so they shouldn’t have
to be dealing with it or worrying about how to modify things” and Teacher E stated,
I think that you have teachers who feel like, this isn’t my job. This is not what my
credential is, I did not sign up for this. I’m having to figure this person out and ignore the
other 27 or 28 kids because this kid needs all my attention.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 74

Trainings Received
The amount of trainings that teachers receive was explored as this was an area that was
lacking based on a study done by Weller (2012) and from the survey data. When asked about the
trainings their school or district provided to them, most teachers had not received any special
education trainings; when specifically asked about trainings surrounding inclusion, teachers
indicated they had not received any such trainings. For example, when questioned about the
kinds of trainings or professional developments they had received, Teacher A responded “I don’t
think I’ve had any,” and Teacher B replied, “we might have an hour session or something on like
maybe behavior or dealing with students with special needs. I feel like we could dive deeper.”
Furthermore, Teacher E declared:
Honestly, there’s not a lot. We’ve asked for some. But we’ve not got . . . here’s what a
good inclusion program looks like . . . here’s some things you can try or this is actually
what’s expected of you and this is not what’s expected of you. I wish there was that. I
wish there was training also for the special ed teachers so that they knew when you’re
sending your students to mainstream, this is what you can expect and share with parents.
Overall Level of Support
As stated earlier, the success and failures of inclusive programs depends on the school
administrators’ ability to support their staff through this transition (Harris, 2009). Teachers were
asked how supportive their principals are overall, not just specifically in the area of inclusion or
special education. The majority of teachers reported that they were supported or very supported.
Teacher A, Teacher C, and Teacher D declared their principal was “very supportive,” “I feel
highly supported” and “very, very supported.” However, Teacher E stated,
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 75

I’d say 50/50, because she’s a great listener and she could really make you feel like you
are being empathized with. But her ability to really change the situation is not, I guess
100%. I find that when I do ask the principal for help, the principal is not on the same
page as you and she wants to be this kid’s friend and kind of make it seem like it’s a good
time. I think the principal is somebody who really wants everyone to feel good. I think
the principal wants the kids to feel good too. And, so the principals’ version of that is
different than mine sometimes.
The next section provides a summary of the findings as they relate to the research questions that
prompted this research.
Chapter Summary
This chapter presented the findings of this mixed-methods explanatory study, intended to
understand and answer the four provided research questions more clearly. It began with a
researcher-developed questionnaire to measure principals’ perceptions and attitudes regarding
supports and trainings for teachers who are including students with autism and emotional
behavioral disorders in their classrooms. Next, the survey data was supported through a
qualitative analysis of principal and teacher interviews. The findings gathered from this study
indicated that though principals believe inclusion is necessary for students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders they have a difficult time supporting their teachers because of a
lack of personnel supports, a lack of trainings regarding inclusion, and difficulty helping in the
areas of differentiating instruction and behavior de-escalation techniques within the classroom.
Principals did indicate that they try to support their staff by being present and providing the
personnel, through a paraeducator, when feasible. Additionally, the findings gathered from this
study found that teachers believe that their principals are not able to provide their needed
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 76

supports because of bureaucracy within the district, a lack of trainings for principals and
teachers, and a lack of money and personnel. Teachers also indicated that they needed principals
to support them by procuring equipment/materials for their students and providing trainings that
focus on inclusion. Chapter 5 includes a summarization of research, practice, and policy
implications. Study limitations will be briefly discussed as well as recommendations for further
study.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 77

Chapter 5: Summary, Findings, Implications, and
Conclusion of the Study
Chapter 5 provides a summary of the purpose of the study, research questions, design
overview, and key findings. It concludes with implications for policy and practices, followed by
limitations and recommendations for further study.
Statement of the Problem
More children with disabilities and special education needs are being placed in
mainstream education, instead of separate schools, because of the current educational policy of
inclusive education (Ferguson, 2014). School leaders, such as elementary principals, need to
take the lead in incorporating students with disabilities, including autism and emotional
behavioral disturbances, in general education classes. However, research has shown that
elementary principals are often not prepared to facilitate this educational transition and they also
don’t understand their role in the implementation (Harris, 2009; Praisner, 2003; Weller, 2012).
Additionally, research by Barnett and Monda-Amaya (1998) and Praisner (2003) has discovered
difficulties related to elementary administrators’ awareness of practices to facilitate inclusion,
preparation to implement and support inclusive education, and that 80% of principals are
uncertain about inclusion for students with disabilities. Additional research is needed to evaluate
elementary principals’ attitudes and perceptions of and ability to support inclusion practices at
their school.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to develop a better understanding of the attitudes and
perceptions of elementary principals around helping teachers and how they provide support to
teachers who are including students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances. This
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 78

study was an explanatory, sequential mixed-methods design. The researcher used an
explanatory, sequential mixed-method design to collect quantitative data, analyze the results, and
then build the qualitative phase. For this study, the researcher initially surveyed elementary
principals to examine their attitudes and perceptions regarding inclusion and the factors that may
predict a successful inclusion program. The researcher then followed up the survey with
qualitative interviews of principals and elementary teachers about the principals’ perceptions and
attitudes and their ability to help and support general-education teachers as part of an
inclusionary program.
Research Questions
The following research questions were used to guide the study:
1. What perceptions do elementary principals have about their ability to help teachers who
are educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive
setting?
2. when educating students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders What
perceptions do elementary teachers have about their principals’ ability to help them
educate students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
3. What kind of support do elementary teachers need from their principals when educating
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in an inclusive setting?
Design Overview
This study was completed using the explanatory, sequential mixed-methods design,
which is a two-phase study that involves collecting and analyzing quantitative data initially and
then builds on those results utilizing a qualitative study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Malloy
(2011) asserted that such a mixed-method study most thoroughly answers all research questions
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 79

and provides a more complete understanding of research problems by drawing on the strengths
of both quantitative and qualitative designs.
The quantitative instrumentation, which was researcher developed, provided information
regarding the principals’ attitudes and perceptions around inclusion for students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances and their ability to support their teachers in order to create the
qualitative interview questions. The researcher used quantitative results in order to tailor her
probes for the qualitative phase as suggested by Creswell and Creswell (2018). Qualitative
research is an inductive method of inquiry which focuses on the meaning and emphasizes the
importance of the interpretation behind the complexity of given situations, in this case inclusion.
Using this approach, interviews with elementary principals and elementary teachers were utilized
to gain a deeper understanding of elementary principals’ and elementary teachers’ perceptions
and attitudes regarding inclusion for students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders and
how principals support their teachers who are including these students.
Data was validated through triangulation since no single method adequately explains the
problem of contending explanations (Patton, 2002). Triangulation facilitates validation of data
through multiple data source verification, such as data triangulation, method triangulation, and
member checking (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Patton, 2002). Triangulation was used to
evaluate the consistency among previous literature and information gathered from interviews.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 80

Key Findings
Principal Findings
There are five key principal findings from this study, based on surveys and interviews:
necessity of inclusion, difficult areas of inclusion, lack of trainings/PD’s in the area of inclusion,
paraeducator support, and being present.
The first key finding was that principals considered inclusion programs a necessary
component of public education and accept that they are responsible for providing support for
these inclusion programs. For example, one principal stated that “special education shouldn’t be
a destination for students.”
A second key finding based on principal interviews was that principals felt the two most
difficult areas to provide support for their teachers was in the area of behavioral support and
differentiation of instruction for their students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders.
For instance, multiple principals mentioned ‘differentiated instruction,’ ‘adjusting work,’ and
‘handling behavior’ when asked where their teachers struggled the most.
The third key principal finding was a lack of trainings and professional developments in
the area of inclusion for their teachers and themselves. None of the principals in the study had
received any trainings from their district specific to inclusion; instead, the only special education
trainings they had received was concerning laws, timelines, and compliance. Additionally,
principals stated that they felt it was necessary to provide their teachers with inclusion training;
however, they hadn’t been able to provide their teachers with those trainings and supports.
The fourth key finding from the principals was their teachers’ request and need for
paraeducator support in their classrooms along with the fact that providing that support is
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 81

difficult. For example, one principal stated that they found it difficult when they “don’t have the
resources or supports to offer to their teachers.”
The last key finding from the principals regarding the support they are able to provide to
their teachers is the ability to be present. This is one area that principals felt they were able to
control and felt they were sufficiently providing to their teachers. Every principal in this study
mentioned the importance of being present for their teachers when implementing an inclusion
program on their campus. For example, principals stated that they connect on a personal level,
they are a sounding board, they are available, and they let them know that they will ‘be there’ for
their teachers.
Teacher Findings
In addition to the five key findings from the principal surveys and interviews, there are
three key findings from the teacher interviews: bureaucracy/supports, training, and willingness to
include students.
The first key finding from the teacher interviews was their belief that the district
bureaucracy and policies don’t allow for their principals to provide the support that they and
their students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders require. For example, one teacher
stated “it’s not the principals’ fault, I think the principals’ hands are tied” and another teacher
said “she doesn’t have personnel resources; I would say the support is the hugest issue and make
sure that we have more than one person in the room to help kids.”
The second key teacher finding from the teacher interviews was the lack of training for
both principals and teachers in the area of inclusion. One teacher stated “most general education
teachers are not trained specifically in these areas, and I feel like they’re overwhelmed and they
just throw their hands up . . . the principal them self is not trained properly.”
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 82

The last key finding from the teacher interviews surrounded the teachers and their
colleagues’ willingness to include students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in
their classrooms. Overall, teachers felt that inclusion was appropriate and that some teachers
were willing when given support personnel, such as a paraeducator. For example, one teacher
stated “I feel like we need support staff that is specially trained to support students . . . when they
come into typical classrooms” and another teacher stated “the situation is usually better the more
support I have . . . it’s really helpful [when] you have a person.”
Implications for Policy and Practice
The findings in the research has implications for both policy and practice. The intent of
the study was to increase the body of research in regards to elementary principals’ attitudes and
ability to help their teachers include students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders,
specifically at the elementary level. The researcher suggests the following implications for
policies and practices to improve principals’ attitudes and their ability to help their teachers who
are including students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders into their general
education classroom.
Policy
The findings from this study, as well as previous research studies such as Mesibov and
Shea (1996), Avramidis et al. (2000), Praisner (2003), and Weller (2012), indicated that there is a
lack of consistently applied policies within and between school districts regarding special
education placements and supports. The lack of credible, consistently applied policies impedes
the equitable access for students with disabilities, specifically students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders. Therefore, policies from the state and/or local education agency
(LEA) level is necessary to formulate a blueprint regarding placements and supports for students
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 83

with autism and emotional behavioral disorders, specifically in regard to helping general
education teachers differentiate instruction and contend with challenging behaviors.
The research from the study, as well as previous research such as Cassady (2011),
Ferguson (2014), and Cohen (2015), found a lack of knowledge and training for both teachers
and principals in the area of inclusion, students with disabilities, and challenging behaviors. This
lack of preparation and ongoing training impedes an unbiased approach to educating students
with disabilities, specifically students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders. The
researcher suggests that policies from the California Teaching Credential (CTC) commission
need to be adjusted and improved to include courses in inclusion, instruction differentiation, and
challenging behaviors during teacher preparation programs. These new teacher preparation
requirements will allow teachers to be more prepared to educate all students equally.
Practices
In addition to the above suggested policies, there are two practices that need to be
implemented and/or improved within schools and districts based on the findings from this study.
Based on the IDEIA (2004), students with disabilities need to be educated within the least
restrictive environment (LRE). This means they need to be educated with students without
special needs as much of the time as possible. Based on the findings from this study, as well as
previous research such as Barnett and Monda-Amaya (1998), Harris (2009), and Haynes (2012),
school districts need to implement LRE for students with disabilities with more efficacy than
current practices. This requires educators to be more informed and secure on ways to include
students with disabilities effectively.
A second practice suggested by this researcher in order for schools and districts to better
educate students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in general education
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 84

classrooms, is to create and implement professional development courses for principals and
teachers that look at how to best include these students. These professional development
courses, run by schools and/or districts, will help teachers understand how to best work with
students with disabilities which will then improve the educational opportunities for these
students.
Limitations
The study was found to have a few limitations, namely that the scope of the disabilities
being studied are children with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances, and that the study
only looked at elementary principals and teachers.
However, it is felt even with these limitations the study can broadly help within the field
of education since inclusion starts and happens the most often in elementary schools. It is
suggested by the researcher that the need for understanding the role and the ability to support
these inclusion programs is most important at the elementary level. Students with autism and
emotional behavioral disturbances continues to rise and, therefore, the numbers for students with
these disabilities being included in the general education environment will also rise.
Recommendations for Future Research
Due to the lack of research, the increasing levels of students with autism and emotional
behavioral disorders within schools, and the vulnerability of these students, further research in
the area of principals’ attitudes and the ability to support inclusive practices is necessary such as:
1. Increasing the number of educators involved in the research, by replicating the study in
other regions within the state of California, to get a larger amount of data which would
decrease any potential bias as well as increase the generalizability of the findings
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 85

2. Enhancing the depth and meaningfulness of the data by adding observations to the survey
and interview data collections
3. Track student outcomes between students who are fully included at an elementary school
whose principal supports inclusion versus students who are included in elementary
schools whose principals are not completely supportive of inclusion practices
4. Measure principal attitudes before and after the staff receives specific inclusion trainings
and professional developments
5. Measure the amount of inclusion done at schools before and after the staff receives
specific inclusion trainings and professional developments
6. Measure the difference between principals who have received inclusion trainings versus
principals who have not received inclusion trainings in regards to their perceived level of
support.
Conclusion
This study adds to the scarce body of literature regarding principals’ attitudes and ability
to support inclusion for students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders. The data
revealed that principals were supportive of inclusion programs within public education and
accept the responsibility to support these programs. However, data has shown that principals
found the areas of behavioral support and differentiation of instruction the most difficult to
provide the necessary support for their teachers. It was found through this research, a lack of
ability to provide support in these areas was demonstrated to be due to a lack of trainings and
professional development. Although principals felt they lacked the ability to fully support their
teachers surrounding inclusion, the data from this study found that they supported their teachers
by being present for them, by connecting with them on a personal level, and being available to
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 86

them. If the ability to provide support via the principals’ presence can be combined with
increased levels education for principals and teachers through preparation programs, trainings,
and professional development, the outcomes for students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders within public schools is likely to improve.

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 87

References

Autism Speaks. (2018). Autism facts and figures. Retrieved from https://www.autismspeaks.org/
autism-facts-and-figures
Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P., & Burden, R. (2000). A survey into mainstream teachers’ attitudes
towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary school in
one local education authority. Educational Psychology, 20(2), 191-211.
Barnett, C., & Monda-Amaya, L. E. (1998). Principals’ knowledge of and attitudes toward
inclusion. Remedial and Special Education, 19(3), 181-192.
Benner, G. J., Kutash, K., Nelson, J. R., & Fisher, M. B. (2013). Closing the achievement gap of
youth with emotional and behavioral disorders through multi-tiered systems of support.
Education and Treatment of Children, 36(3), 15-29.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1997). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An Introduction to
Theories and Methods (5th.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Leadership and management effectiveness: A multi-frame,
multi-sector analysis. Human Resource Management, 30(4), 509-534.
Boyle, C., Topping, K., Jindal-Snape, D., & Norwich, B. (2012). The importance of peer-support
for teaching staff when including children with special educational needs. School
Psychology International, 33(2), 167-184.
Brotherson, M. J., Sheriff, G., Milburn, P., & Schertz, M. (2001). Elementary school principals
and their needs and issues for inclusive early childhood programs. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education, 21(1), 31-45.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 88

Brown v. Board of Education. (1954). Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483
(1954). Retrieved from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/feder al/us/347/483/ case.html
Cassady, J. M. (2011). Teachers’ attitudes toward the inclusion of students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorder. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, 2(7), 5.
Cohen, E. (2015). Principal leadership styles and teacher and principal attitudes, concerns and
competencies regarding inclusion. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 758-
764. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.105
Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mapping the field of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed
Methods Research, 3(2), 95-108.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Döş, İ., & Savaş, A. C. (2015). Elementary school administrators and their roles in the context of
effective schools. SAGE Open, 5(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014567400
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). (1965). Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/
nonpublic/eseareauth.pdf
Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, DC: The
Albert Shanker Institute. Retrieved from http://www.shankerinstitute.org/sites/
shanker/files/building.pdf
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 89

Ferguson, G. (2014). Including children with disabilities in mainstream education: An
exploration of the challenges and considerations for parents and primary school teachers
(Masters dissertation, Dublin Institute of Technology). Retrieved from https://pdfs.
semanticscholar.org/899d/b1153e615c51947cd60e3cd6bce0cc818fee.pdf
Friend, M., Cook, L., Hurley-Chamberlain, D., & Shamberger, C. (2010). Co-teaching: An
illustration of the complexity of collaboration in special education. Journal of
Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20(1), 9-27.
Gamm, S., Elliott, J., Halbert, J. W., Price-Baugh, R., Hall, R., Walston, D., . . . & Casserly, M.
(2012). Common core state standards and diverse urban students: Using multi-tiered
systems of support. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.
George, M. P., George, N. L., Kern, L., & Fogt, J. B. (2013). Three-tiered support for students
with E/BD: Highlights of the universal tier. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(3),
47-62.
Giangreco, M. F., Carter, E., Doyle, M. B., & Suter, J. C. (2010). Supporting students with
disabilities in inclusive classrooms. In R. Rose (Ed.), Confronting obstacles to inclusion:
international responses to developing inclusive education (pp. 247-264). London:
Routledge.
Habegger, S. (2008). The principal’s role in successful schools: Creating a positive school
culture. Principal, 42-46. Retrieved from https://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/
resources/1/Principal/2008/S-O_p42.pdf
Harris, J. D’L. (2009). Elementary school assistant principals’ attitudes toward inclusion of
special needs students in the general education setting (Doctoral dissertation, Texas
Woman’s University). Available from ProQuest.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 90

Harrower, J. K. (1999). Educational inclusion of children with severe disabilities. Journal of
Positive Behavior Interventions, 1(4), 215-230. doi:10.1177/109830079900100404
Haynes, H. A. (2012). Multi-tiered systems of supports: An investigative study of their impact on
third grade reading test scores in an urban district (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Kansas). Retrieved from https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/bitstream/handle/1808/10006/
Haynes_ku_0099D_12115_DATA_1.pdf;sequence=1
Iadarola, S., Hetherington, S., Clinton, C., Dean, M., Reisinger, E., Huynh, L., . . . & Kasari, C.
(2015). Services for children with autism spectrum disorder in three, large urban school
districts: Perspectives of parents and educators. Autism, 19(6), 694-703. doi:10.1177/
1362361314548078
Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act of 1997. (1997). Public Law 105-17. Retrieved
from http://www.nectac.org/~pdfs/idea/pl105-17.pdf
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). Public Law 108-446.
Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncser/pdf/pl108-446.pdf
Jacobs, J. F. (2012). Strategies utilized by special education local plan area directors to
influence superintendents with special educations programs and services which improve
student achievement (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Southern California). Available
from ProQuest.
Kurz, A., Elliott, S. N., Lemons, C. J., Zigmond, N., Kloo, A., & Kettler, R. J. (2014). Assessing
opportunity-to-learn for students with disabilities in general and special education
classes. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 40(1), 24-39.
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 91

Lewis, T. J., Chard, D., & Scott, T. M. (1994). Full inclusion and the education of children and
youth with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 19(4), 277-293.
doi:10.1177/019874299401900404
Lindsay, S., Proulx, M., Scott, H., & Thomson, N. (2014). Exploring teachers’ strategies for
including children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream classrooms.
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(2), 101-122.
Loiacono, V., & Allen, B. (2008). Are special education teachers prepared to teach the increasing
number of students diagnosed with autism? International Journal of Special Education,
23(2), 120-127. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ814449.pdf
Loiacono, V., & Valenti, V. (2010). General education teachers need to be prepared to co-teach
the increasing number of children with autism in inclusive settings. International Journal
of Special Education, 25(3), 24-32.
Manna, P. (2008). Federal aid to elementary and secondary education: Premises, effects, and
major lessons learned. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED503895.pdf
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Applied social
research methods series, Vol. 41. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Applied
social research methods series, Vol 41. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mayrowetz, D., & Weinstein, C. S. (1999). Sources of leadership for inclusive education:
Creating schools for all children. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 423-449.
doi:10.1177/00131619921968626
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 92

McDonnell, J., Thorson, N., Disher, S., Mathot-Buckner, C., Mendel, J., & Ray, L. (2003). The
achievement of students with developmental disabilities and their peers without
disabilities in inclusive settings: An exploratory study. Education & Treatment of
Children, 26(3), 224-236.
McFarland, J., Hussar, B., de Brey, C., Snyder, T., Wang, X., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., . . . & Hinz,
S. (2017). The Condition of Education 2017 (NCES 2017-144). U. S. Department of
Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017144.pdf
McIntyre, L. J. (2011). The practical skeptic: Core concepts in sociology (5th ed.). New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2001). School leadership that works: From
research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and interpretation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mesibov, G. B., & Shea, V. (1996). Full inclusion and students with autism. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 26(3), 337-346.
Malloy, C. (2011). Moving beyond data: Practitioner-led inquiry fosters change. Edge, (6), 4.
National Institute of Mental Health. (2018). Autism spectrum disorder. Retrieved from
https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/autism-spectrum-disorders-asd/index.shtml
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 93

Northouse, P. G. (2007). Transformational leadership. In P. G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory
and Practice (7th ed.), (pp. 161-194). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Northouse, P. G. (2017). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice (4th ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Powell, C. (2018). A phenomenological study of exemplary elementary school principals leading
through conversational intimacy, interactivity, inclusion, and intentionality (Doctoral
dissertation, Brandman University). Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.brandman.
edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1187&context=edd_dissertations.
Praisner, C. L. (2003). Attitudes of elementary school principals toward the inclusion of students
with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69(2), 135-145. doi:10.1177/0014402903069
00201
Ramirez, R. C. (2006). Elementary principals’ attitudes towards the inclusion of students with
disabilities in the general education setting (Doctoral dissertation, Baylor University).
Available from ProQuest.
Reynolds, M. C. (1989). An historical perspective: The delivery of special education to mildly
disabled and at-risk students. Remedial and Special Education, 10(6), 7-11.
doi:10.1177/074193258901000604
Richards, L. (2014). Handling qualitative data: A practical guide (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Rudd, F. (2002). Grasping the promise of inclusion. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/full
text/ED471855.pdf
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 94

Ryan, M. L. (2016). Leadership characteristics, practices and board perceptions that support
superintendent longevity in suburban school districts: A case study (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern California). Available from ProQuest.
Savich, C. (2008). Inclusion: The pros and cons: A critical review student disabilities under No
Child Left Behind: Facts and myths. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
ED501775.pdf
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Responsiveness-to-intervention and school-wide positive
behavior supports: Integration of multi-tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17(4),
223-237. doi:10.1080/09362830903235375
Telzrow, C. F., & Tankersley, M. (2000). IDEA Amendments of 1997: Practice guidelines for
school-based teams. Bethesda, MD: NASP Publications.
U. S. Department of Education. (2017). The Rehabilitation Act of 1973: As amended through
P.L. 114–95, enacted December 10, 2015. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/
speced/reg/narrative.html
Webb II, A. C. (2011). Closing the achievement gap by means of professional learning
communities (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Southern California). Available from
ProQuest.
Weller, L. G. (2012). Principals’ attitudes toward inclusion: Including students with autism in
elementary classrooms (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania).
Retrieved from https://knowledge.library.iup.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=
https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1496&context=etd
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 95

Williams, J. M. (2015). Attitude and perceptions of public school principals in Illinois toward
inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education classroom (Doctoral
dissertation, McKendree University). Available from ProQuest.
Yell, M. L., Rogers, D., & Rogers, E. L. (1998). The legal history of special education: What a
long, strange trip it’s been! Remedial and Special Education, 19(4), 219-228.

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 96

Tables

Table 1
Survey and Interview Selection Criteria

Participants Criteria
Principals Three years of being a principal in an
elementary setting
Teachers Three years of teaching in an elementary
setting

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 97

Table 2
Survey Participants
Number of
Survey
Participants
Average Years
in Education
Average Years
as Principals
Courses/Trainings
in Special
Education

25

23.8 6.8 6.0

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 98

Table 3
Principal Survey Data
Question Mean
Standard
Deviation
My teachers require additional training to appropriately educate students
with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in their classrooms

3.36

0.68
My teachers need more training to appropriately teach students with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders

3.24

1.08
I need more training to appropriately help my teachers who are
including students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders

3.04

1.04
My teachers feel supported by me when facing challenges in educating
students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders

2.80

0.40
I provide my teachers with sufficient support when they have students
with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in their classrooms

2.80

0.57
My general education teachers are willing to have students with autism
and emotional behavioral disorders in their classrooms

2.72

0.60
My district and/or I provide trainings, conferences, and workshops for
my teachers regarding inclusive education

2.40

0.79
I am able to provide the materials/resources needed to appropriately
educate those students in the general education environment

2.36

0.69
My district provides me with sufficient training opportunities to
appropriately educate students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders

2.04

0.45
My district provides my teachers with sufficient training opportunities
to teach students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders

1.84

0.46

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 99

Table 4
Principal Interview Participants
Principal
Years as a
Principal
Courses/Trainings
for Inclusion via
the District
Length of
Interview
(minutes)

Principal A

3

0

19

Principal B

20

0

33

Principal C

5

0

58

Principal D

5

0

27

Principal E

14

0

24

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 100

Table 5
Teacher Interview Participants
Teacher
Years as a
Teacher
Length of
Interview
(minutes)

Teacher A 21 17

Teacher B 16 19

Teacher C 5 18

Teacher D 2 19

Teacher E 19 52

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 101

Figures

Figure 1: Triangulation
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 102

Figure 2: Success of Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disorders Using Asset-
Based Theory Perspective Leadership and Transformational Leadership Practices

Transformational
Leadership
Practices
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 103

Appendix A: Cover Letter

Dear Participant,

My name is Tamara Quinn and I am a doctorate student at the University of Southern California
(USC). For my final project, I am examining an elementary principals’ perceptions, attitudes,
and ability to help general education teachers who are including students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders in their classrooms. As an elementary principal, you are an
invaluable asset to this study so I am inviting you to participate in this research study by
completing the attached survey.

The following survey will require approximately 7 to 10 minutes to complete. There is no
compensation for responding nor is there any known risk. In order to ensure that all information
will remain confidential, each survey will be done anonymously through Survey Monkey. If you
choose to participate, please answer all questions as honestly as possible and submit the
completed survey promptly. Participation is strictly voluntary and you may refuse to participate
at any time. The chairperson of this dissertation is Dr. Rudy Castruita and he can be reached
at rcastrui@usc.edu for any further questions or concerns about my research.

Interviews will be done as a follow-up to the survey responses to get a better understanding of
how elementary principals perceive students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders
being included in general education classrooms and how they are able to help their teachers. If
you are interested in participating in an interview, which will be done in June at your
convenience, please email me back with your name and your contact information (email or
phone number). I would greatly appreciate your participation.

Thank you for taking the time to assist me in my educational endeavors. The data collected will
provide useful information regarding principals’ perceptions, attitudes, and ability to help their
teachers. If you would like a summary copy of this study, please let me know by responding to
this email. Furthermore, if you require additional information or have questions, please contact
me at the email or number listed below.

Survey Link

Sincerely,
Tamara Quinn
University of Southern California
tamaraqu@usc.edu

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 104

Appendix B: Survey

Quantitative Survey

Number of years as an elementary level principal: _______

Number of total years in education (teaching, paraprofessional, etc.): ______

Numbers of years working in a special education environment: ______

Number of courses, trainings, and professional development received in teaching children with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders _______

SD= Strongly Disagree
D= Disagree
A= Agree
SA= Strongly Agree

Question SD D A SA
1. My educational background prepared me to
effectively help teachers who are teaching students
with autism and emotional behavioral disorders

2. My teachers need more training to appropriately
teach students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders

3. I need more training to appropriately help my
teachers who are including students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders

4. I provide trainings, conferences, workshops for my
teachers regarding special education and inclusive
education

5. I am able to help my teachers when issues arise
6. My district provides my teachers with sufficient
training opportunities to teach students with autism
and emotional behavioral disorders

7. I feel comfortable working with my general
education and special education teachers to support
the students

8. My teachers require additional training to
appropriately educate students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders in their classrooms

9. Students who are two or more years below grade
level should be in special education classrooms

10. Students who are diagnosed with autism need to be
in special education classrooms

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 105

11. Students who are verbally aggressive can be
educated in general education classrooms

12. Collaborative teaching is necessary for students with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders when
they are educated in the general education classroom

13. My teachers require additional personnel when
educating students with autism and emotional
behavioral disorders in the general education
classroom

14. My general education teachers are willing to have
students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders in their classrooms

15. I am able to provide the resources needed to
appropriately educate those students in the general
education environment

16. Students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders should be taught by special education
teachers

17. My teachers are able to approach me with concerns
they have about teaching students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders

18. My teachers feel supported by me when facing
challenges in educating students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders

19. My district provides me with sufficient training
opportunities to appropriately educate children with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders

20. My educational background has prepared me to
teach students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders

21. Students who are diagnosed with emotional
behavioral disorders need to be in special education
classrooms

22. I provide my teachers with sufficient support when
they have students with autism and emotional
behavioral disorders in their classrooms

23. General education teachers should not be
responsible for teaching students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders

24. I am able to provide my teachers with sufficient
materials to make the appropriate accommodations
for students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders

Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral Disturbances 106

25. I struggle to help my teachers with the issues that
arise from having students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders in their classrooms

Please list the top three supports that teachers request from you when educating students with
autism and emotional behavioral disorders and rate on a scale from 1 to 10 your ability to
provide that support.

1= not possible to provide that support
10= no problem providing that support

1.
2.
3.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This dissertation investigated inclusion in elementary school. The study used a mixed method study to examine the perceptions, attitudes, and ability of elementary principals to help general education teachers who include students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in their classrooms. The topic was chosen due to the higher prevalence of students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in schools, requiring principals’ support. This study found that principals have more inclusive attitudes regarding students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders than in previous studies

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A study of the leadership strategies of urban elementary school principals with effective inclusion programs for autistic students in the general education setting for a majority of the school day

PDF

Strategies Orange and San Diego county superintendents employ to build capacity in secondary principals as instructional leaders

PDF

Leadership styles conducive to creative tension in decision making among principals, vice principals, and deans at K-12 school sites

PDF

Identifying resiliency factors viewed by fourth and fifth grade teachers that foster academic success in elementary minority Hispanic students in Orange County

PDF

Teachers' perspectives on the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorders in the general education classroom: a gap analysis

PDF

Effective transformational and transactional qualities of 7-8 intermediate school principals who create and sustain change in an urban school setting

PDF

Use of Kotter’s change model by elementary school principals in the successful implementation of inclusive education programs for students with disabilities in K-6 elementary schools in Southern ...

PDF

Female elementary school principals and building capacity for teacher leaders

PDF

Strategies Riverside and San Bernardino county superintendents employ to build capacity in secondary principals as instructional leaders

PDF

Elementary school principals' impact on effective professional learning communities in public schools in California

PDF

Future Ready Schools: how middle school principals support personalized and digital learning for teachers and students at mid-sized urban middle schools

PDF

Principal implementation of Education Code 215: pupil and student suicide prevention policies in southern California public middle schools

PDF

The influence spouses have on superintendents in Los Angeles County school districts

PDF

The role of the principal in schools that effectively implement restorative practices

PDF

Strategies to create a culture of inclusion for students with special needs

PDF

Successful strategies and skills utilized by high school principals as perceived by Southern California superintendents

PDF

Qatari elementary school principals' attitudes toward inclusion programs: implementation challenges, solution and resources

PDF

Professional learning communities: secondary site and district leaders’ role in developing collective efficacy in public schools in southern California

PDF

Schoolwide structures, systems, and practices that are closing the achievement gap at a Southern California high-performing, high-poverty urban public elementary school: a case study

PDF

Successful strategies and skills utilized by high school principals as perceived by San Diego County superintendents

Asset Metadata

Creator Quinn, Tamara (author)

Core Title Elementary principals attitudes, perceptions, and their ability to support students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances in inclusive settings

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Defense Date 11/12/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag attitudes,elementary,inclusion,OAI-PMH Harvest,perceptions,principals,Special Education,supports

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Castruita, Rudy (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Roach, John (committee member)

Creator Email tamaraqu@usc.edu,TQuinn52@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-300337

Unique identifier UC11664172

Identifier etd-QuinnTamar-8478.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-300337 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-QuinnTamar-8478.pdf

Dmrecord 300337

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Quinn, Tamara

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA